This is a great and apt lyric from The 59th Street Bridge Song by Simon & Garfunkel. One critical competence for a professional adviser is knowing when to slow down and take the foot off the gas. This may be (1) during a deal in order to resolve a problem, or (2) when it has finished to recognise achievement and learn from it. This is particularly pertinent as we return reinvigorated from summer holidays ready to reengage in our working world with renewed energy and enthusiasm. I have been reading another book by Professor Steve Peters A Path Through the Jungle - see my blog back in February Managing our Chimps in Negotiations. The author explains complex neuroscience with a mind model utilising a chimp analogy for the instinctive part of our behaviour. He tells a great story about an elite athlete he coached successfully to both a world championship and a world record. However, after a few weeks the athlete appeared unsettled (again) and as Professor Peters says “Their Chimp then offered me one of my favourite Chimp quotes: “I know I set a world record but I didn’t set a good world record”.!” In our busy and driven professional working lives the same “chimp” mentality or reaction as that of the athlete can be unproductive and even unprofessional.
See this briefing 8 situations where it's better to slow down at work which reports on an article in the Wall Street Journal by two Stanford professors. "We all know the feeling of rushing into fix something before we even know what's going on ….And we know what happens: We not only don't fix anything, but we make the problem worse." They cite eight situations where employees should be encouraged to slow down including:
“1. When you have to make big, irreversible decisions
According to Amazon founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos, leaders should consider whether the decisions they're making are "one way" or "two way" doors. One-way doors are "consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible, ….and one-way decisions "must be made methodically, carefully, slowly, with great deliberation and consultation."
2. When you're trying to solve complicated problems
In a 2023 study published in Nature Communications, researchers found that individuals with higher scores in general intelligence took longer to solve difficult problems. This longer problem-solving time also led to greater accuracy since they did not prematurely leap to incorrect conclusions.
3. When you're doing creative work
According to Teresa Amabile, a psychologist and professor at Harvard Business School, people will perform poorly on creative work when they have to work quickly, efficiently, and avoid making mistakes.”
I also like this article A Strategic Leadership Paradox: Slow Down to Speed Up which observes “We live in a culture where “Go go go,” and “Fail fast,” are norms….. AND YET … moving too fast can cause errors, self-centeredness, misunderstandings, lack of innovation and strategic thinking, chaos, and so much more.” It sets out the costs of moving too quickly which include errors, communication breakdown and lack of strategic thinking and cites supporting research. “A Harvard Business Review study of 343 companies found that businesses that chose to “go, go, go” without slowing down enough to be strategic about their business decisions ended up with lower sales and operating profits than the compared companies, which “paused at key moments to make sure they were on the right track.”” It cites strategies to “slow Down to Speed Up”including one I consider key: “Focus on Long-Term Vision Over Short-Term Wins.”
In a complex high value negotiation, all sorts of time factors come into play, some more “real” or relevant than others, which impact timing and behaviour including:
Ultimately as professionals I suggest we should strive to achieve a balance between urgency and concluding a successful and effective contract where both parties win and meet their expectations. When this happens taking time after the deal has closed to understand why and what went well so as to repeat the pattern is critical. Too often the pressures of private practice and fee earning targets mean we move onto the next transaction almost before the previous one has finished. Even in industry I have rarely seen successful “lessons learned” processes that actually work. Often there is a rather low-key one-off effort, but in reality, deals soon become history.
I propose that a separate part of the organisation from the bid team should drive this “slowing down” and conduct a post deal “lessons learned” review process designed to turn individual wins into repeatable patterns and strategies for the purchaser and the supplier. This can cover commercial, operational, legal, risk acceptance and relationship dimensions. Capturing the knowledge and documentation developed by the bid team for the benefit of the delivery team and future negotiations is vital. Key stages include:
Actually, in my experience it is relatively easy to come up with such a process including a post deal review checklist (ClaudeAI will readily create one for you) and to hold one wash up meeting after the contract has been signed. However, then some kind of business inertia almost always kicks in and well-meaning efforts to capture and implement lessons learned simply evaporate. The window for self-reflection rapidly closes as new commercial pressures take over. There are a number of reasons for this:
I don’t have a complete answer to this conundrum but maybe the art here is to shift from a single exhaustive wash up to an embedded, continuous review process led by a dedicated function which as I say is independent of the bid or delivery teams. This can capture insights early, build governance into the handover, improve ongoing delivery with stakeholder support, create living playbooks and enhance cross functional ownership. The focus should be on improved processes not on critiquing or indeed praising individuals.
“Nature does not hurry, yet everything is accomplished.” — Lao Tzu.
“There is more to life than increasing its speed.” — Mahatma Gandhi.
“Be not afraid of going slowly, be afraid only of standing still.” — Chinese Proverb.
See this briefing 8 situations where it's better to slow down at work which reports on an article in the Wall Street Journal by two Stanford professors. "We all know the feeling of rushing into fix something before we even know what's going on ….And we know what happens: We not only don't fix anything, but we make the problem worse." They cite eight situations where employees should be encouraged to slow down including:
“1. When you have to make big, irreversible decisions
According to Amazon founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos, leaders should consider whether the decisions they're making are "one way" or "two way" doors. One-way doors are "consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible, ….and one-way decisions "must be made methodically, carefully, slowly, with great deliberation and consultation."
2. When you're trying to solve complicated problems
In a 2023 study published in Nature Communications, researchers found that individuals with higher scores in general intelligence took longer to solve difficult problems. This longer problem-solving time also led to greater accuracy since they did not prematurely leap to incorrect conclusions.
3. When you're doing creative work
According to Teresa Amabile, a psychologist and professor at Harvard Business School, people will perform poorly on creative work when they have to work quickly, efficiently, and avoid making mistakes.”
I also like this article A Strategic Leadership Paradox: Slow Down to Speed Up which observes “We live in a culture where “Go go go,” and “Fail fast,” are norms….. AND YET … moving too fast can cause errors, self-centeredness, misunderstandings, lack of innovation and strategic thinking, chaos, and so much more.” It sets out the costs of moving too quickly which include errors, communication breakdown and lack of strategic thinking and cites supporting research. “A Harvard Business Review study of 343 companies found that businesses that chose to “go, go, go” without slowing down enough to be strategic about their business decisions ended up with lower sales and operating profits than the compared companies, which “paused at key moments to make sure they were on the right track.”” It cites strategies to “slow Down to Speed Up”including one I consider key: “Focus on Long-Term Vision Over Short-Term Wins.”
In a complex high value negotiation, all sorts of time factors come into play, some more “real” or relevant than others, which impact timing and behaviour including:
- False deadlines.
- Fear that the deal will go to someone else.
- Professional advisers’ fees mounting up.
- Delay in the savings and other benefits the deal is intended to bring.
- “Playing” the normal negotiating game with the expected engagement.
Ultimately as professionals I suggest we should strive to achieve a balance between urgency and concluding a successful and effective contract where both parties win and meet their expectations. When this happens taking time after the deal has closed to understand why and what went well so as to repeat the pattern is critical. Too often the pressures of private practice and fee earning targets mean we move onto the next transaction almost before the previous one has finished. Even in industry I have rarely seen successful “lessons learned” processes that actually work. Often there is a rather low-key one-off effort, but in reality, deals soon become history.
I propose that a separate part of the organisation from the bid team should drive this “slowing down” and conduct a post deal “lessons learned” review process designed to turn individual wins into repeatable patterns and strategies for the purchaser and the supplier. This can cover commercial, operational, legal, risk acceptance and relationship dimensions. Capturing the knowledge and documentation developed by the bid team for the benefit of the delivery team and future negotiations is vital. Key stages include:
- A wash up meeting with all key stakeholders within 2 weeks of signing
- Comparing the final deal metrics with the original objectives.
- Reviewing what went well and what could be improved
- Determining how to codify and share knowledge.
Actually, in my experience it is relatively easy to come up with such a process including a post deal review checklist (ClaudeAI will readily create one for you) and to hold one wash up meeting after the contract has been signed. However, then some kind of business inertia almost always kicks in and well-meaning efforts to capture and implement lessons learned simply evaporate. The window for self-reflection rapidly closes as new commercial pressures take over. There are a number of reasons for this:
- the cross functional deal team disbands
- a delivery team takes over with a narrower focus and less historic knowledge
- the intense push to reach contract signature leaves teams exhausted and unwilling to participate in lengthy retrospective meetings
- nobody wants to reopen sensitive issues or face criticism over complex compromises
- the focus of key stakeholders moves on to or opportunities or challenges.
I don’t have a complete answer to this conundrum but maybe the art here is to shift from a single exhaustive wash up to an embedded, continuous review process led by a dedicated function which as I say is independent of the bid or delivery teams. This can capture insights early, build governance into the handover, improve ongoing delivery with stakeholder support, create living playbooks and enhance cross functional ownership. The focus should be on improved processes not on critiquing or indeed praising individuals.
“Nature does not hurry, yet everything is accomplished.” — Lao Tzu.
“There is more to life than increasing its speed.” — Mahatma Gandhi.
“Be not afraid of going slowly, be afraid only of standing still.” — Chinese Proverb.
RSS Feed
