Persuasion, the Sheryl Crow paradox, and Antonella’s yogurt rule

I am reading The Secrets of Consulting by Gerald Weinberg (have you noticed how I always talk about books before I finish reading them? And BTW, thanks to Jared Spool and Kyle Pero for the book suggestion). By “consulting” Weinberg means “how to convince others that you can help them and how to be successful in helping them”. The book is quite entertaining and has some good insights on the art of persuasion and self-promotion.

I have a couple of ideas on how to address consulting challenges, too. Weinberg has a kick for breakfast food analogies (e.g., the law of raspberry jam, the orange juice test, and so on), so I came up with my very own Antonella’s Yogurt Rule. Before I introduce the Yogurt Rule, though, let’s step back for a moment and discuss the Sheryl Crow paradox.

When I was young I had this insane idea that what people told me about themselves and their situation was the truth; even worse, I thought it was an immutable and definitive truth. At that time, I had this even more insane idea that people confide their problems to friends because they want to solve them. This shows how little I knew about people.

For example, a girlfriend would burst into tears telling me how badly her boyfriend treated her and how hurt she was. I would say, “If he’s so bad to you, why don’t you leave him?” and she would look at me with a strange expression and mumble something unintelligible. Then a few days later I would meet her again and she would tell me how great things were with her boyfriend and how happy she was with him. I would feel puzzled and slightly betrayed, unable to decide if my friend had lied to me the first time she described her relationship with the boyfriend or the second time. But really, this was just an example of the Sheryl Crow paradox:

If it makes you happy
Then why the hell are you so sad?

[I had a long discussion with my husband on the real meaning of this verse. He interpreted it as “try to enjoy the good things you have even when things are bad;” after carefully reading the rest of the song, I have to admit that this is probably the right interpretation. My initial interpretation was “You are trying to justify your situation and avoiding making it better by telling me you are happy, but I can see you are not.” I found this difference interesting, because it demonstrates how the description of conflictual feelings can generate completely different interpretations and suggest different courses of action. Sheryl, what do you think?]

My friend was not lying to me. She was faithfully describing her feelings and perceptions in that moment. Feelings and perceptions are situational, not definitive. As a matter of fact, she probably perceived her boyfriend as mean and hurtful and at the same time she felt he made her happy.

I failed to understand the situation because I was applying an engineering approach to human feelings. Which is the wrong approach, because human perceptions and emotions can be explained better by quantum physics than by classical mechanics. Schrödinger’s cat is alive and dead, my friend is happy and unhappy, and her boyfriend is good and bad for her. Bye-bye, Newton.

The second thing I didn’t understand then was that when people have problems they look for something that can make them feel better within their current paradigm. My friend didn’t want to leave her boyfriend; she loved him. She wanted to feel better with the smallest possible change to her situation. She wanted to shift her position just a bit to feel more comfortable. I could have helped her by just listening and comforting her and not discussing a solution; or I could have suggested some very minor adjustments (“Did you talk to him about this?”). She asked for a nail clipper; I offered her a chainsaw. She thought I was crazy.

Although I tend to be excessively radical when trying to find solutions to my friends’ relationship problems, I am really not different from anybody else. I throw a lot of energy into preserving my current paradigm and my belief system.

Which brings us to Antonella’s Yogurt Rule. I have this strong belief that alive food is better that dead food. I believe that anything that has enzymes, is fermented, or has still potential for growth (like seeds, fresh vegetables, miso, and yogurt) is better for me. Not sure how I came up with this strong belief, but it fits my general life philosophy quite nicely. This means that I tend to remember things that agree with my believes and reject and forget things that do not. I believe that yogurt is great for me, so I remember that TV report of a study showing that people eating yogurt with live active cultures had improved immune system functions and caught fewer colds in the winter.

When I validate diets, the Yogurt rule helps me categorize very rapidly a nutritional approach as good or bad. For example, people at my gym promote a diet that, among other things, forbids the consumption of dairy, including yogurt. It took me a few milliseconds to decide that the diet was not for me. To accept the no-yogurt diet would have meant giving up the belief that alive food is good for me, which is a crucial component of my nutrition belief system.

The Sheryl Crow paradox and Antonella’s Yogurt Rule can help decision making in any domain in which human relationships, feelings and perceptions play a crucial role. Which means they apply to business as much as to distressed girlfriends.

Let’s summarize:

  1. As stated in the Sheryl Crow paradox, our feelings and perceptions about people and situations are complex, contradictory, and continually changing; at any given time, we feel good and bad about something, we are happy and sad, enthusiastic and unmotivated. One day person A cannot stand person B; the next day they work together like best friends. Department A collaborates like a charm with Department B for years; suddenly, they become unable to complete the new project due in a week because of irreconcilable differences. Nobody is lying to you. They are not playing with your mind.
    Learn how to deal with contradictory perceptions, understand what creates the shift from very good to catastrophic, and use it to make things better without too much noise.
  2. Most of the time, people don’t talk about their problems because they want to change their situation. They talk about their problems because they want to feel more comfortable. Talking about problems allows them to vent, which is a nice temporary stress reliever, receive attention and sympathy, and sometimes even modify other’s behavior in beneficial ways. People talk about their problems so they don’t have to change their situation.
    If you can sneak in a solution that doesn’t look like a big change but just like a slight adjustment and promises great relief, you are golden.
  3. When giving advice, consider Antonella’s Yogurt Rule. If the advice contradicts the belief system held by the person or the organization on the receiving end, it will never be adopted even if it’s obviously sound and sensible advice. The cost of accepting the advice (shaking the foundation of what somebody believes is right) is too high, no matter what the benefits are.
    So, make sure you know everything you can about the belief system of the individuals and organizations you work with. Learn how to present your problem-solving suggestions and your proposals in a way that supports their belief system and not shattering it.

Follow these rules, and nobody will be able to resist you. I promise.

6 Comments

  1. Derek K. Miller
    January 17, 2006

    As an engineer, you seem to have taken what is usually considered a very male approach to your friend’s boyfriend complaint. That is, by stereotype (and, in my experience, in truth on average) we men think that when someone (male or female) is complaining about a problem, that is the same as asking us for suggested solutions.

    On average, and by stereotype, women find this confusing, because they are usually not seeking a solution, but sympathy, or empathy, and discussion. That also explains why women often talk about their problems, while men — who also adhere to your Yogurt Rule — often do not. We’re just as stuck in our preconceptions, but since men see talking about a problem as asking for a solution, we don’t (on average) talk (especially to one another), because just like women, we don’t want suggestions, especially ones that will question our belief systems.

    This also explains two further things: men like to talk about cars and gadgets and such things because we CAN suggest solutions without threatening anything; and we DO talk to women about problems, because they’ll usually commisserate with us rather than proposing radical solutions as another man would.

    Note: IANAP (I am not a psychologist).

  2. Eddie James
    January 17, 2006

    Another brilliant piece of writing! My favorite Sheryl Crow song is “If it makes you Happy” and I’ve also struggled to interpret it. So, I’m glad someone else in this crazy world has pondered the deeper meanings of Miss Crow.

    And I’m going to print out this post and re-read it often because I tend to give terrible advice to friends. Actually, I give great advice, but I tend to try to fix the situation instead of following rule 2 or your Yogurt Rule.

    Thanks for sharing.

  3. Antonella Pavese
    January 18, 2006

    Dear Derek,
    that was a really interesting comment.

    You might be surprised to learn that I am not an engineer. I work in IT, but I started as a usability person, and IAAAP (I am actually a psychologyst)! However, I can see where you get that impression: my father was an engineer, and I grew up knowing that he wished I were a boy. This must be why sometimes I reason like a male engineer.

    But my desire to fix problems rather than just offering sympathy is a reaction to my mother. My mother always complained about my father, her mother, her life, and even me and my sister, but never changed anything. So I am suspicious of people who only ask for reassurance. I like to believe that my mother’s life could have been much better had she done something brave for herself.

    I would argue that my desire to offer solutions comes to excessive empathy. When I listen so somebody I feel the pain or joy in my own bones, which motivates me to do something, anything to make things better for them.

    I got much better in distinguishing when a friend is asking just for empathy or is expressing a true strong distress that needs to be dealt with. However, I still get frustrated when people I care about complain about their situation but don’t do anything about it. And I don’t mean small whining, I mean serious issues that make them really unhappy. Life is too short to only ask for empathy to your friends when your life is truly miserable.

    And by the way, I love gadget and technology. I like your explanation that one of the advantages of gadgets is that they can fix problems and can be fixed if they break.

    As you can see, if we follow stereotypes, I am a total gender mess.

  4. Derek K. Miller
    January 18, 2006

    And that’s why I said “on average.” There are plenty of men who live to empathize and support, and plenty of women who want to fix, so relying too much on the Mars-Venus thing is counterproductive when dealing with individual real people.

  5. Laurie
    January 25, 2006

    It makes total sense to talk about books BEFORE you finish reading them. A friend of mine mentioned last night that when she reads, she does not retain much of the book afterwards. I thought about myself and I’d have to say that this is true for me as well. I really could not tell you much about that last book on Buddhism that I read, other than that I enjoyed it and it was somehow comforting.

    So it makes total sense to talk about the subject while it is fresh in your mind and still exciting to you. Go for it! I look forward to hearing about what you are currently reading 🙂

  6. […] Persuasion, the Sheryl Crow paradox, and Antonella's yogurt rule […]

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top