Pain, Gain, and Business Growth

IGA Marketing • January 12, 2016

Imagine that you experience a flash of inspiration and conceive a clever idea for a business venture. You quickly execute on your idea and make a fast profit of $10,000. How do you think you would feel? No doubt you would be happy with your success.


Now imagine that instead of a fast $10,000 profit, you immediately lost $10,000. You would feel really bad, discouraged, and upset. In fact, the pain you would experience over losing $10,000 would far exceed the happiness you would enjoy if you had profited by $10,000.


Scientists have studied the human brain and have learned that we are wired in ways that make us experience the pain of loss more deeply than we experience the joy of gain. As Nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky put it: “In human decision making, losses loom larger than gains.”


Savvy marketers and merchandisers understand this. A company selling energy efficient refrigerators does better advertising “avoid losing hundreds of dollars in energy costs” than it does by saying “save hundreds of dollars on energy bills.”


This evolutionary adaptive quirk of human nature – called negativity bias – which makes us feel loss more strongly than gain, has important implications in a variety of business contexts. And it explains human behavior in ways useful for executives managing businesses for growth to understand.


Consider the following experiment by Dean Buonamano and described in his book, Brain Bugs. As with all experiments, there are two conditions. In condition one, participants are given $50 and two options:

Option one: Keep $30

Option two: Gamble the $50 with a 50 percent chance of keeping the entire $50 and a 50 percent chance of losing the entire $50.


Forty-three percent of the experiment participants selected option two: A chance at the whole pot, with an equal chance of losing it all.


In condition two, the first option was this: Lose $20. This time, 61 percent of the participants opted for option two, the gamble option. That’s a statistically significant over 40% increase in people making the least rational decision.
This experiment, and many others like it, clearly demonstrate how risk aversion influences thinking in ways that lead to illogical and irrational choices, often to the decision maker’s detriment.


Consider the following implications for business decision-making and execution, particularly as it impacts managing for growth.


Risk taking: Loss aversion leads to unwise risk-taking. As seen in the experiment described above, more study participants confronted with the pain of loss (lose $20,) made a bad gamble than did participants experiencing the joy of gain (keep $30.) Either way, the risk was a bad one. The decision to forego a certain $30 for a risk-adjusted $25 is plainly irrational.


Decision making and execution: An executive faced with a growth investment decision, such as spending on a program to improve the sales and marketing departments’ performance, will be naturally inclined to reject the proposal.
The discomfort at the thought of losing the amount invested in the program looms far greater in a decision maker’s mind than does the taste of success the program would bring if it works as expected.


Creating business growth: In his book, Thinking Fast and Slow, Kahneman said: “Loss aversion is a powerful conservative force that favors minimal changes from the status quo in the lives of both institutions and individuals.” Where business growth is often based on a model of assessment, planning, and execution, loss aversion can be a major obstacle and source of resistance for managers trying to grow businesses.



The challenge for decision makers is to understand the scientific fact of feeling the pain of loss more intensely than the joy of gain, and to confront and overcome it in the decision making and execution processes. Those who can do so will be more successful in growing businesses than those who cannot.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

To learn how Integrated Growth Advisors can help you solve your business challenges, contact David Landrum, Partner, at 860.295.1459 or 312.882.3266, or dlandrum@integratedgrowthadvisors.com.


By Dan McMahon, CPA, CM&AA December 16, 2024
With the college football playoffs set and the NFL season coming down the home stretch, there have been countless close games going down to the final seconds. The difference between winning and losing often has more to do with a team’s culture and preparation than it does with their pure talent. In the same way, most accounting firms have smart, conscientious, talented people at all levels of the organization. The difference between high performing firms and mediocre firms is that the high performers have the ability to stay in alignment and hold their composure when the pressure is on. While it’s easy to put your organization’s core values on the wall of your lobby or locker room, you don’t find out who has really bought into those values until the you-know-what hits the fan. Like elite sports teams and military units, high-performing firms stay together and stick to the game plan when faced with a big client loss, departure of a key employee, or busy season fire drills. Under the same circumstances, lesser firms throw in the towel, point fingers, and watch staff head for the exits. Sound familiar? Sun Tsu, the legendary general and philosopher of ancient times said, “Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” In the heat of battle, I’ve found, you must think like a triage unit in combat. Casualties are all around you and coming in fast; you must treat the most serious life-threatening injuries before the ones that are merely painful – no matter how anguished the victim. In the heat of battle, you’re not going to get perfection. You must do the best you can with the people, resources and time you have to work with. As a leadership coach, I’ve noticed that firms with a strong culture and governance model are particularly well equipped to handle “battlefield” conditions. They tend to have four characteristics in common:
By Daniel McMahon November 29, 2024
December 4 2024 | 10 am PST / 1 pm EST
July 10, 2024
Dan McMahon contributed to the following article in Illinois CPA Society's Insight Magazine summer issue on the topic CPA firm M&A.
June 24, 2024
Check out Dan McMahon who recently appeared as a guest on Doug Noll’s Listening with Leaders podcast. Dan and Doug discuss the importance of listening as a leader, the art of improvisational theater performing, and why management teams must follow a parliamentary procedure for decision making.
By Daniel McMahon June 6, 2024
Key Takeaways
By Daniel McMahon June 4, 2024
See Dan McMahon’s latest article on Firm Governance Best Practices, which was published in the Summer issue of New Jersey CPA Magazine.
By Daniel McMahon April 11, 2024
Key Takeaways
By Daniel McMahon March 16, 2024
A March Madness primer for corporate teams
By Daniel McMahon September 11, 2023
"Don't confuse firm governance with ESG"
More Posts
Share by: