Conquer Change Part 1
Imagine the apocalypse is upon us.
Let’s say Ebola or some other radical disease has reduced the planets population down to 600 people.
Everyone is likely to die without help and YOU have to make a decision.
Let’s say Ebola or some other radical disease has reduced the planets population down to 600 people.
Everyone is likely to die without help and YOU have to make a decision.
A scientist believes she has found a cure, but she isn’t sure.
She has two versions and can’t bear to choose between them.
Her scientific estimates are exact, but she leaves the choice up to you.
She has two versions and can’t bear to choose between them.
Her scientific estimates are exact, but she leaves the choice up to you.
Now here are your two options.
Read carefully so you can choose correctly.
Read carefully so you can choose correctly.
- Cure A is guaranteed to save exactly 200 people.
- Cure B has a 1/3 probability of saving 600, but a 2/3 probability of saving NO ONE.
The fate future generations is now in your hands.
Which do you pick?
Which do you pick?
Let me repeat them so you can be sure:
Cure A is guaranteed to save exactly 200 people.
Cure B has a 1/3 probability of saving 600, but a 2/3 probability of saving NO ONE.
Cure A is guaranteed to save exactly 200 people.
Cure B has a 1/3 probability of saving 600, but a 2/3 probability of saving NO ONE.
Mark your answer Cure A or B and let’s reimagine the scenario.
Same setup, everyone is going to die without a cure, but this time if you use Cure C it is certain exactly 400 people will die. Cure D has a 1/3 probability of killing no one, but a 2/3 probability killing 600.
Same setup, everyone is going to die without a cure, but this time if you use Cure C it is certain exactly 400 people will die. Cure D has a 1/3 probability of killing no one, but a 2/3 probability killing 600.
Which one do you choose? Yes I’ll repeat:
Cure C it is certain exactly 400 people will die.
Cure D has a 1/3 probability of killing no one, but a 2/3 probability killing 600.
Now choose.
Cure C it is certain exactly 400 people will die.
Cure D has a 1/3 probability of killing no one, but a 2/3 probability killing 600.
Now choose.
In the first scenario did you pick Cure A and Cure D in the second?
You realize that both situations presented were actually the same with different framing.
The results showed how quickly we flock to the option that minimizes loss—the one with the least perceived change. Because we’re so opposed to inciting change, logic can go right out the window. Crazy, isn’t it?
You realize that both situations presented were actually the same with different framing.
The results showed how quickly we flock to the option that minimizes loss—the one with the least perceived change. Because we’re so opposed to inciting change, logic can go right out the window. Crazy, isn’t it?
In this 2 part series, we are going to help you conquer change.
So why is it that we struggle so much with change?
So why is it that we struggle so much with change?
It is because our brain does not like change.
It prefers the safety, survival and essentially the status quo.
It prefers the safety, survival and essentially the status quo.
One way to understand this is by looking at our brain’s threat-reward system.
The motivation behind much of our behavior is driven by the desire to minimize threat andmaximize reward. Neuroscientists call this fundamental principle the ‘walk towards, run away’ theory.
The motivation behind much of our behavior is driven by the desire to minimize threat andmaximize reward. Neuroscientists call this fundamental principle the ‘walk towards, run away’ theory.
When we feel threatened due to a proposed merger, a restructure in the organization or anticipation of a presentation we have to give to a large audience, we are inclined to avoid what seems threatening, rather than embrace it. We feel uncertain, our brains focus on the negative and we find ways to disengage.
Our brains are extremely effective in tenaciously maintaining the status quo.
The design of our brain predisposes us to taking the easy way out.
The design of our brain predisposes us to taking the easy way out.
At the same time we wouldn’t be human if we couldn’t change.
Human society is one of constant change and reinvention.
We evolved from single cell organisms over eons, so adaptation is in our blood.
Human society is one of constant change and reinvention.
We evolved from single cell organisms over eons, so adaptation is in our blood.
As modern humans we are geared to life-long learning and growth.
Our brain cells are continually forming new connections and restructuring our perceptions and physiology over time. This process of neuroplasticity happens thousands of times a day, giving us enormous potential to change if we put awareness, effort and commitment into making it happen.
Our brain cells are continually forming new connections and restructuring our perceptions and physiology over time. This process of neuroplasticity happens thousands of times a day, giving us enormous potential to change if we put awareness, effort and commitment into making it happen.
So how do we reprogram our brain to welcome and accept change? In next week’s post I will give you six brain hacks to short circuit your brain’s natural tendency to sabotage your change and get you started on a massive personal transformation. Make sure you are subscribed HEREso you don’t miss out on what transformed my life (and brain!) so that I could start conquering change. Trust me, it’s a good one.
http://darrenhardy.success.com/2015/03/conquer-change-1/
No comments:
Post a Comment