Eng
Eng
Senior Management Consultant, Organization & Human Capability Development
It's hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if it isn't there.
Confucius
I first heard the phrase “Are we looking for a black cat in a dark room?” during a discussion among several scientists about the rationality of a research hypothesis.
The search for a black cat in a dark room, especially when no cat is there, expresses the idea of futile effort. It symbolizes a pursuit of something that likely does not exist and is ultimately absurd. Although this phrase is attributed to Confucius, it is more of a philosophical concept than a direct quote. Applying this idea to the context of Organizational Behavior creates a powerful metaphor, reflecting the wasteful expenditure of energy and resources in organizational management, leading to inefficiency.
In this article, I will try to answer the following questions:
Why do organizational leaders search for a black cat in a dark room, losing consistency and harming the organization in the process?
Why do intelligent people make elementary and absurd mistakes?
To answer these questions, let's consider several theories.
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)
Do you remember the anxiety in school while waiting for an invitation to a classmate's party? Or the feeling of missing an important event? These emotions are linked to anxiety and regret, commonly referred to as the Fear of Missing Out (FOMO).
The Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) has been a part of human nature and our daily lives since ancient times. Early humans instinctively understood that missing out on food, shelter, or a suitable mate could jeopardize the survival of their species. Therefore, this fear is universal and present in every person, race, generation, and gender. However, with the advent of technology, particularly social media, FOMO has significantly intensified.
Herman first highlighted FOMO in 2000 (Herman D, 2000), using the term to describe consumer behavior. However, after the COVID-19 pandemic, the term became more generalized, with modern authors using it to explain anxiety. Given this growing trend, people are often referred to in literature not as HOMO Sapiens but as FOMO Sapiens.
In the context of Organizational Behavior, FOMO reflects human anxiety and fear of missing out on an opportunity, innovation, or trend that may be crucial. Here, we talk about a leader who, under the influence of FOMO, is constantly searching for new initiatives and losing consistency.
FOMO can manifest in the following forms:
Copying every new trend that may be less relevant or inappropriate for the business.
Constantly implementing innovations and initiatives when core business processes are not yet established.
Making hasty decisions that are not aligned with the company's long-term strategy.
Taking unjustified risks, such as investing significant resources based on current trends and intuition without prior market analysis.
In today's world, the pursuit of new ideas is essential. However, decisions fueled by FOMO can lead to impulsive and unpredictable leadership, much like searching for a black cat in a dark room—even when it isn’t there.
Fast Thinking (System 1) vs. Slow Thinking (System 2)
According to Daniel Kahneman's book «Thinking, Fast and Slow», people use two different thinking systems when making decisions. When the outcome is easily predictable or when we encounter something familiar, we make fast, intuitive decisions; this type of thinking is called System 1. On the other hand, when faced with a complex task or unfamiliar environment, we start applying more deliberate and slow thinking, activating System 2.
Fast thinking, or System 1, is the brain's automatic mode, which conserves effort and energy. It is formed based on previous experience, decisions, and the environment in which we grew up. Often, System 1 is helpful as it saves energy, helps us navigate our environment, and avoids constantly reconsidering details. For example, in everyday life, we use System 1 more frequently, while System 2, which involves slow thinking, can be tiring and irritating when used often.
However, it's important to note that System 1 has its drawbacks—it is prone to errors, subjective judgments, and biases. System 1 does not account for important details and relies on existing experience.
The choice between fast thinking (System 1) and slow thinking (System 2) is fully conscious; a person chooses which system to rely on when planning. It is also worth noting that System 1 operates automatically, like an autopilot, so in stressful situations or when fatigued, a person is inclined to make decisions with minimal energy expenditure, using System 1.
This is why intelligent people sometimes make very simple mistakes and, based on System 1, may instruct their team to search for a black cat in a dark room, as it worked in the past. In such cases, we encounter a pattern-based approach and a rigid attitude toward the surroundings ("don't miss the important stuff"). As a result, the company may stagnate instead of correctly utilizing and developing new opportunities.
How can this be changed?
Fear of missing out (FOMO) can be a powerful and legitimate motivator for both leaders and teams. However, it's crucial to recognize its potential downsides. Striking a balance between fast, instinctive thinking (System 1) and slow, analytical thinking (System 2) is essential for effective decision-making.
While it's natural to rely on fast thinking for routine tasks, navigating complex situations requires the deliberate approach of slow thinking. It's important to remember that both FOMO and fast, automatic thinking are intrinsic parts of us. They can be managed through self-reflection, continuous development, seeking feedback from your team, and maintaining a healthy work-life balance. These practices help ensure that you don’t overlook critical details due to stress or incomplete information, avoid making decisions driven solely by FOMO or Fast thinking, and most importantly, resist the temptation to chase a black cat in a dark room, especially when it isn’t there.
Did you know that nearly 60% of employees report feeling emotionally drained by the end of each workday? With the evolution of the labor market, focusing on employee well-being has ceased to be a luxury or a one-off initiative—it has become a necessity for survival and the foundation for long-term success.
The driving force behind a company is its strong employees. The viability of an organization depends on the realized potential and well-being of each worker. Experience and international empirical research show a direct link between employee well-being and their productivity, effectiveness, and commitment to the organization. The higher the employee's well-being, the more they are a team player, show empathy toward others, and are more productive and effective in their work processes, which is the cornerstone of organizational success.
Given this situation, it has become evident to modern HR specialists and managers that well-being is not an additional but an integral value of the company. Consequently, for proactive, development-oriented organizations, one of the primary tasks is to implement a human-centered culture, ensure a safe environment for employees, and promote their well-being. This involves increasingly frequent and prioritized adoption of various supportive approaches and interventions.
The Concept of Well-Being
Well-being is a comprehensive concept that, according to the perspective of positive psychology, extends beyond rational factors to include psychological aspects such as socio-emotional, mental, and cognitive resilience. Various theoretical reviews and empirical studies suggest that achieving employee happiness and well-being in an organization is contingent upon providing various motivational factors and circumstances:
Emotional Well-Being: Numerous studies confirm that employees' emotional resilience, ability to self-regulate and adapt emotions, optimism, and positive attitude toward work significantly influence work motivation, approach to tasks, and the quality of work performed. Conversely, a combination of negative emotions such as anxiety, tension, and irritation can lead to emotional burnout and professional exhaustion. These symptoms often become primary or at least indirect causes of job departure.
Social Well-Being: Considering that employees spend a third of their time at work, the style of interaction in the work environment, opportunities for receiving and exchanging support and empathy, are particularly important. Factors such as cooperation, shared joy, a sense of belonging, pride in achievements, and belief that the environment supports and values you, are guarantees of a safe environment and healthy social interaction, which, in turn, forms the basis for employee retention and the accumulation of positive capital in the long term.
Professional Well-Being: An employee’s perception of their activities and role is a critical component of well-being. Organizations need to be aware: is the employee passionate about what they do? Do they believe in the importance of their work? Do they consider their work valuable? How competent do they feel? Do they have a sense of autonomy? Do they see their contribution to achieving the company's overall goals and vision? These questions determine internal motivation, interest, productivity, and ultimately, employee effectiveness. Providing career paths, opportunities for continuous learning, and recognizing employee achievements are effective strategies for enhancing professional well-being.
It is clear that a high level of professional well-being is key to employee productivity and, consequently, to the effectiveness and success of the organization.
Physical Well-Being: Beyond physical endurance, a crucial aspect is the feeling of safety and security in the workplace. It is also important for the organization to understand how work conditions and the environment contribute to employees feeling good and being productive.
Financial Well-Being: The importance of this aspect relates to how employees' financial security, fairness, and adequacy of compensation compared to the work performed significantly impact their motivation, attitude toward work, and desire for long-term collaboration with the company.
Thus, focusing on individual aspects of well-being, as well as the overall picture, improves indicators of resilience, engagement, and productivity; strengthens organizational loyalty; creates a healthy and positive work climate; fosters a high-performance culture; and ultimately enhances the organization's internal success, ecosystem, viability, as well as productivity and reputational resilience.
Well-Being Diagnosis
We believe that the first step towards creating a human-centered, safe environment in an organization is assessing the components whose combination is essential for achieving well-being. Well-being diagnostics allow the organization to understand what employees think and feel, identify issues in organizational climate and culture, and determine which well-being parameters require more attention and targeted interventions.
To this end, ACT has developed a unique model—the Employee Well-Being Matrix—which is based on a holistic view of well-being and symmetrically provides organizations with data on both overall and specific well-being indicators—where it is stable and where it requires support.
The Matrix: A Compass for Employee Well-Being
The Well-Being Matrix is like a lens that allows you to see even the most challenging organizational well-being issues. In this labyrinth, the matrix is not just a diagnostic tool but a symbol of balance and clarity. Research identifies pain points, and targeted responses to them make strategic interventions much more effective.
We believe that just as the matrix creates balance, sequence, and structure in complex and sometimes chaotic data, the Well-Being Matrix will bring similar clarity and a clear vision to organizations, serving as an important compass on the path to creating a human-centered, positive climate.
When it comes to powerful storytelling in advertising, few stages are as prominent as the Olympics. Brands like Nike and Coca-Cola have long understood the value of emotional connection during such high-stakes global events. But as we’ve seen in recent Olympics, the way emotions are used in advertising can be the difference between just grabbing attention and truly moving people to action.
Take Nike’s “Winning Isn’t for Everyone” ad, for instance. At first glance, it seems like a perfect match for the Olympic spirit with its portrayal of athletes driven by a relentless, almost ruthless ambition. However, there’s a catch. The ad starts with a provocative question: “Am I a bad person?” and then goes on to link greatness with traits like deception, obsession, and a lack of empathy. On paper, this fierce drive looks compelling, but it misses the mark in some key ways.
The problem lies in the ad’s portrayal of greatness. By associating success with negative traits like ruthlessness and a lack of compassion, it creates a misleading picture. True greatness, whether in sports or any other field, is not about trampling over others or losing one’s humanity. It’s about fierce determination balanced with respect for others and a strong sense of personal integrity.
Nike's intention might have been to highlight the relentless drive required to achieve greatness, but the execution fails to address the importance of maintaining a balance between ambition and ethical conduct. Great athletes are known for their dedication and intense focus, but they also understand the significance of compassion, respect, and a well-rounded approach to success. The best athletes manage to channel their drive without compromising their core values or well-being.
In stark contrast, Coca-Cola’s “It’s Magic When the World Comes Together” ad excels by weaving a story of unity and upliftment around South African swimmer Tatjana Schoenmaker. Rather than simply showcasing competition, this ad evokes hope, redemption, and togetherness—emotions that connect on a deeply personal level. This approach not only engaged audiences but also fostered a strong emotional connection with the brand. It shows that empathy and shared human experiences can be as powerful as intensity and competition.
So, what can brands learn from these two contrasting approaches? The key takeaway is that while competition is a powerful theme, how it’s presented can make a huge difference. Nike’s ad had intensity but lacked the emotional depth needed to create a lasting impact. Coca-Cola, on the other hand, reminded us that the most memorable ads are those that go beyond competition and touch on universal human experiences.
As we look forward to future Olympic advertising, there’s an opportunity for brands to not only celebrate the triumphs of competition but also to explore the softer, more relatable sides of these stories. Whether through humor, hope, or the simple act of coming together, the ads that leave a lasting impression are those that connect with us on a human level.
In the end, the most effective creative work doesn’t just tell us who won—it shows us why it matters. And that’s a lesson worth remembering, not just for the Olympics, but for all brand storytelling.