Cliches that Drive Your Business

Clichés drive much of our self-talk and conversations. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “cliché’” as “something that has become overly familiar or commonplace.” Since cliched are familiar, we may fail to appreciate the underlying cognitive structure. And that can be dangerous.

In this blog, we will focus on three clichés’: “On the bus or off the bus,” “If Ii ain’t broke don’t fix it,” and “It could fail.”

“On the bus or of the bus”

This cliché’ could apply to employees or to customers who fail to renew contracts. For example, in a headline entitled “CEO Ties Enthusiasm to Office,” The Wall Street Journal quoted WeWork’s CEO Sandeep Mathrani as saying, “Those who are least engaged (with their work) are very comfortable working from home.” (2021). This is clearly an “On the bus or off the bus” statement.

The underlying cognitive structure assumes a closed social system: You are either on or off. It also is an example of binary thinking. Binary thinking looks at the world as black/white, good/bad; patriot/villain, etcetera.

The cliché can justify treating people in a transactional way. If we are going to terminate a group of employees, focus on cost minimization. Once they are "off the bus," who cares? Focus financial resources on helping employees "on the bus." It is also used to justify not spending time/money to cultivate former clients or prospects that selected competitors.

The effective challenge to “on the bus or off the bus” is to question the validity of the underlying closed-system perspective. For example:

A client of ours boasted that one of his best business decisions was to provide generous executive outplacement services for a subordinate he fired. Years later, our client was seeking to acquire a competitor. That former employee had become a senior executive in the acquisition target. The person became a champion of the transaction and a key positive force for integration. That would not have happened had our client taken an “on the bus or off the bus” attitude.

To cite an example of an open-systems perspective:

If a company turns down Stybel Peabody’s sales proposal, the authors continue to maintain contact with that company. There may be other projects with that company in the future. The winner of today’s sales contest may be out of the running for the next one.

“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”

The underlying cognitive framework is binary thinking. Something is working or it is broken. A binary framework might be appropriate for a simple mechanical device. What if analog thinking is a better framework for complex technical and social systems? Analog means framing the problem on a scale. For example:

One of our clients provides back-office IT services to life insurance companies. The CEO has an attitude of “It it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The VP Sales sees that competitors are offering more complete IT services at attractive prices. The major life insurance companies may be clients today, but the VP knows that today’s customers are looking at competitor offerings when the contract is up for renewal.

To counter “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” the VP is suggesting that the company’s offerings aren’t broke but they are breaking down. On a scale of 10 (well suited and well-priced) to 0 (badly suited and badly priced) he states that the company is at a level 5 and heading to level 4. The company will feel the impact when the contracts come up for renewal.

The VP uses the following analogy with the CEO: The brakes on your car are functioning. But they are in the process of breaking down. “If I told you, it was breaking down at a 5 level on a 0-10 scale, would you want to fix the bakes now or wait until your brakes fail while driving down a hill?”

Probabilistic remarks are an effective way to break binary thinking.

Consumer Behavior Essential Reads

How Temu Uses Psychological Hacks to Encourage Overspending

The Sustainable Food Solution That Satisfies No One

“This (negative event) could happen.”

The underlying cognitive structure is binary thinking. For example:

The VP Marketing wants $500,000 to set up an exhibit at an international trade show. The CFO opposes the expense, saying, “It could be a total waste of money.”

The problem with “This (negative event) could happen” is that it dares you to make a counter binary argument that is illogical. Can the VP Marketing promise that the new sales generated by participating in the trade show will compensate for the costs to attend? It is impossible to predict, therefore the CFO’s argument seems to be the winner.

Of course, that is also illogical. Suppose we tell you that an airplane taking off from your local airport could lose power and crash into your home today. It is hard to make a convincing case that it could never happen. The only way to challenge "could" is to utilize ordinal thinking. “Yes, such an event could happen, but on a scale of 0-10 the probability is perhaps .00001.

In the case of the $500,000 trade show expense, you can make the following probabilistic argument to counter binary thinking: “Over the next two months following the trade show, there is a 80% chance we will get new leads for our pipeline. and a 65% chance of new sales paying for the expenses of attending the show.

Summary and Conclusions.

Business decisions can sometimes be based on cliches uttered by powerful actors. We have tried to show you how to examine the underlying cognitive structure behind three common cliches. Refuting binary thinking with ordinal or probabilistic statements is an effective way of combating binary and closed-systems thinking.