Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Change 101: How to Handle the Changes that Come Your Way

One of the few things that are constant in this world is change. At the same time, many people just don’t like change. As a matter of fact, the only person I know that always likes change is a wet baby!
Having said that, I believe that most people do not like change because they either don’t know how to respond to it, or respond poorly.



One way to think about this is that change is like waves on the beach. Just like change, waves are relentless, can be very powerful, and there’s really only three things you can do with a wave: let it knock you down, survive it, or ride it.


Let’s take a closer look at each of these three ways to handle change.


Letting it knock you down
We let the waves of change knock us down when we take what I call the “dead roach approach” to change. That is, flat on our back, feet in the air, and just let it take control.


You can tell you are taking this approach when you say things like:
“I’m so stressed out!”
“I can’t take this!”
“This isn’t fair.”
“Why does this always have to happen to me?”



Surviving it
Doesn’t surviving change sound like a good thing to want to do? While in a few cases it’s really the only thing you can do, it really isn’t the optimal approach to take. I don’t know about you, but merely surviving doesn’t sound like a very compelling way to live to me.


If you’re thinking and saying these things, you’ve probably settled on merely surviving:
How can I get through this?
What’s the worst that could happen here?
I don’t know if I can take this.
What can I do to get by?
The problem with taking a survival approach is that you just merely get by. When you’re ready to do more than just get by, it’s time to begin.........



Riding it
Riding the waves of change means moving from a state of survival to a state I call “thrival.” Thrival is simply the process of making change work for you.


Here are some questions to ask to begin to learn how to thrive on change:
How can I make this work for me?
What’s good about this?
What does this change allow me to do that I couldn’t do before?
What positive things might this change force me to do that I might not have thought of doing before?
Since life has handed me a lemon, how can I make lemonade?


Change is inevitable. How we handle it is optional. Make the choice to ride the waves and you’re likely to create a compelling life for yourself. Article Source: http://www.bigarticle.com/



Visit SecretsofGreatRelationships.com for tips and tools for creating and growing a great relationship. You can also subscribe to our free 10 day e-program on how to enrich your relationship today, from relationship coach and expert Jeff Herring.


View the original article here

Labels: , ,

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Framing Changes Everything

Framing Is Everything

A young priest asked his bishop, “May I smoke while praying?” The answer was an emphatic “No!”

Later, when he sees an older priest puffing on a cigarette while praying, the younger priest scolded him, “You shouldn’t be smoking while praying! I asked the bishop, and he said I couldn’t do it!”

“That’s odd,” the old priest replied. “I asked the bishop if I could pray while I’m smoking, and he told me that it was okay to pray at any time!”

As this joke shows, the way you frame a problem profoundly influences the solutions you get. The same problem, when seen from a different angle can lead to a directly opposite interpretation!

Skillfully framing problems is paramount for better problem solving and decision making.

On the flip side, it’s too easy to fall into thinking traps when it comes to framing. Let’s look at one of these traps — and offer some ideas on how to overcome it.

Let’s make a thought experiment, shall we?

Suppose the government is gearing for the outbreak of an unusual disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed, and you must choose which one you think is better. These are the estimates of the outcomes for each program:

Program A: 200 people will be saved.

Program B: There’s a 1/3 chance that 600 people will be saved, and a 2/3 chance that no people will be saved.

Make a note of your choice.

Now suppose that, instead of those two programs above, you’ve been presented with the following two programs instead. As in the previous situation, pick the one you think is better.

Program C: 400 people will die.

Program D: There’s a 1/3 chance that nobody will die, and a 2/3 chance that 600 people will die.

Which programs did you pick for the two questions above? (Hint: Most people pick A and D.)

This question was asked in a famous experiment by Tversky and Kahneman (which led to a Nobel Prize for Kahneman), with 72% of participants choosing option A over B, and 78% choosing D over C.

Well, I don’t know about you, but for me these are astonishing results!

Why?

In case you didn’t notice, programs A and C are identical, as are programs B and D. They’re objectively the same — the same number of people live and die, with the same odds — but they’re presented — or framed — in different ways!

If people were to act consistently, it would be expected they would pick either A-C or B-D. But the change in wording alone was enough for people to shift their choices from the first option to the second. Many people chose inconsistently compared with their previous choice.

And that’s how powerful framing is.

No matter how “rational” we think we are, emotions and mental images play a large part in our decisions — many times preventing us from seeing the real content behind our options.

Have you ever heard that people are in general averse to risk?

Well, the experiment we looked at strongly suggests that that statement may not be entirely true. When the programs were presented in terms of lives saved, the participants preferred the safe program (Program A). However, when the programs were presented in terms of expected deaths, participants chose the gamble (Program D). If people were risk averse, they’d always choose the safe option.

People are willing to gamble — but usually only when the gamble can avoid losses.

It turns out that in our minds losses are much stronger than gains. We feel much stronger negative emotions when losing than positive emotions when winning (about 2 times stronger according to some studies).

We feel much more disappointed losing $1000 than happy when earning $1000. Saving 200 lives is good, but it is not as appealing as the possibility — even if not that favorable — of avoiding the loss of 600.

If framing has such an impact in how we decide and solve problems, what is the “correct way” of framing a problem? How can we protect ourselves from our biases? Here are four ideas.

Never accept the initial framing without at least some thought — whether it was formulated by you or by someone else.

Try different perspectives and look for distortions in thinking. Play with your problem definition.

Because our perceptual positions determine how we view things, it’s important to learn how to shift perspectives and look at a subject in different ways.

To avoid the biases of posing your problem as losses or gains, state the problem in a neutral way — one that combines both positive and negative perspectives. Make it in such a way that it is redundant, simultaneously encompassing multiple reference points as objectively as possible.

In our previous example with the disease programs, it could become:

Program A: 200 people survive. 400 people die.

Program B: 1/3 chance for 600 people to survive and 0 to die, and 2/3 for 0 people to survive and 600 to die.

Regardless of which of the options you end up choosing, you can now evaluate them in a much more balanced way.

Take your problem, invert it and see how you feel about it.

For example, if it’s about earning $1000, imagine that you already have it and now would lose it. In the same manner, if it’s about losing $1000, imagine that you’re $1000 behind and that you’ll earn it.

Check how that feels comparing to the original situation. If you notice a strong asymmetry between your feelings in both situations, this is a strong signal that you’re being affected by the framing of the question.

Check for elements in your problem that trigger disproportionally emotional responses. It’s always useful to be aware of the role our own emotions play when we make decisions. Acknowledge and express your emotions — it would be impossible not to, anyway — but don’t let them cloud your vision.

To separate the rational and the emotional components of the problem, detach yourself from it: Imagine the situation is happening to someone else, someone you don’t know. Conversely, get the opinion of other people who are not involved.

Tune the emotions down for a minute to add a new perspective to your problem. Then feel free to tune them back up.

Now, it’s over to you… Have you ever been affected by misframing a situation? Were you able to reframe it? How did it work? Share in the comments!


View the original article here

Labels: , ,

Visit My Information Mall