Storytelling’s corrosive effects on decision making
TED™ celebrates its 40th anniversary conference in Vancouver next month – a testament to the power of storytelling to convey ideas and a driver in popularizing storytelling in our culture and business spheres today. It got me thinking about storytelling in business case proposals.
The cheerleaders of storytelling generally focus on three benefits of storytelling when presenting proposals to business leaders:
1. Attention – stories are more entertaining than facts so hold the room’s focus better.
2. Illustration – stories can use examples to explain facts and analysis.
3. Persuasion – stories can be more powerful than facts and analysis in swaying decisions.
Despite the cheerleaders’ enthusiasm, storytelling usually does more harm than good in the context of business decisions.
Attention
If this is an important decision but the discussion does not hold an executive’s attention, then the material is not focusing on the relevant insights critical to the decision – fix that!
Illustration
Stories are still only anecdotes – not to be confused with data but are too often a substitute for compelling data (the Hamburger Helper of business cases). If a story is delivered, demand a clear account of how the data does and does not support what the anecdote suggests.
Persuasion
Storytelling cheerleaders rightly emphasize the emotional power of stories above all. The evidence of emotions’ role in our decisions is overwhelming. We rare see it in ourselves – but then that’s why it’s called a blind spot. Regardless of my education and intelligence, to think I am immune is woefully wrong. “Emotional power” is really a euphemism for emotional manipulation – to sway a decision with emotions instead of (and sometimes in spite of) a compelling case built on merits.
Unfortunately, we have come to tolerate one-sided pitches rather than objective delivery of complete and balanced information. Not only are second-rate proposals funded, superior ideas are disadvantaged when they lack an accomplished pitchman. Resources are squandered in both scenarios.
So…
What guardrails does your approval process reliably enforce to maintain focus on objective merits and exclude emotional manipulation? Thinking back to recent proposals: how often are stories and other fluffy peripherals infiltrating approval reviews? If mercilessly scrutinized, how much do stories, images and other window-dressing reliably reinforce reality versus fish for your emotional response?
The best defense is to limit the format to the sterile pros and cons of the proposal. Yes, it initially feels boring (then again, you’re not expecting entertainment, right?). Most of your teams will be grateful as they no longer waste time dressing up proposals with distracting images and pulling together a song & dance. Most will also sense greater fairness when approvals are granted on their merits versus losing out to lesser ideas propelled by elaborate pitches.
But be warned! Your most accomplished showmen go apoplectic when denied use of their most powerful advantages. Stripped of persuasion (read: “manipulation”) techniques, they must now compete on merit!
Right Tool For The Right Job
Instead of allowing storytelling to erode decisions, engage storytelling’s power after the decision is made. Then it is the right time to inspire those tasked with implementing the decision, fueling commitment and energy to maximize success. It is too powerful a tool to go to waste!
Strategic Bets 