6 Comments
User's avatar
Mina Abdulla's avatar

What if the question isn’t in hugging or not hugging the fish, but it's learning to discern between a dying fish or a transforming one? Because what looks like a tiny fish might actually be the beginning of an ocean. And the only reason you know that is because you’ve been the one hugging it

Expand full comment
Anat Deracine's avatar

Only you would try to hug an entire ocean, not just a fish. :D

Expand full comment
Cody Smith's avatar

Two tendencies of the mind in play here:

1. We act in patterns. When a situation seems to match something we've encountered before, we subconsciously use those past experiences to guide our actions, especially if the previous outcome was painful--we learned from it, and we're now hard-wired to avoid repeating it. Say you miss a morning flight and lose a job because rebooking screwed up your interview. Now you're hard-wired to avoid morning flights when there are potential downstream consequences, and you are probably completely unaware of that bias unless you really slow down and think about it.

2. We only consider potential discrepancies between our experiences and others' when conflict arises. At that moment, we begin to realize that we have expectations and goals that are fully implicit, and not shared by the group. Maybe you're shocked that Jeff doesn't already have his shoes on, because the flight is in two hours, and your goal was to leave earlier. Jeff didn't sit in that traffic jam with you before that last flight, so he doesn't expect two hours to be insufficient time, so didn't share your goal.

So when parents ask why this room is a mess, it's because the children didn't share their expectation that it would be clean at that moment. Similarly, you are a hugger and just give everyone a hug when you meet them, so eventually you meet a fish and try to hug it--just acting in pattern. Someone else who is not a hugger will see what you're doing and point out--don't hug that fish, that's not what it wants!

In any case, this is why journaling* is so powerful. It forces you to slow down and think about your decision making process, and recognize when your programming might not line up with others'. If it comes up over and over again, it's helpful to assign a name to the pattern, so you can be aware of it, when you fall into it, and you can talk to other people about it. A really good name is memorable, and metaphors usually are. That's why you get "hugging the fish".

So what you need to do is start picking apart and naming the patterns that led you to hug the fish. One that I often use is "consistifying", which is a good instinct, but frequently pointless work when it's not attached to a real goal. That's just one example; overcomplicating is a build-up of many such patterns.

*: Therapy does the same thing, just aided by another person.

Expand full comment
Anat Deracine's avatar

Wow, this is so incredibly insightful. Thank you!

So much goodness here: from recognizing and naming patterns (memorably), to recognizing when we're reacting on pattern rather than responding to what's actually happening right now.

Also, OMG consistifying feels like a corporate disease that ossifies the bones of the organization and its systems into rigidity. Such a good name!

Expand full comment
Simarjit Kaur's avatar

Fabulous insights...will think about the complexity factors...and fish

Expand full comment
Anat Deracine's avatar

Thank you!

Expand full comment