Reaction to The Expert (A Short Comedy Skit)

[@DanielDavis-kl5cl]

Quality content man. This is really helpful advice for me as I have a burning desire to become an expert electrician and computer scientist.

[@hollybigelow5337]

Even though I think I understand this reaction and it was extremely helpful to hear an analysis from a non-expert who understands why the non-experts behave the way they do, there were still some parts of this reaction that had my blood boiling. As experts, we certainly can find better ways of working with other people. I will admit that. But first, you have to remember that most people who are in fields acting as experts most of us tend to have very literal minds, and we are going to respond to questions in very literal ways. And this isn't always the "wrong" response. Perhaps there are better ways to phrase things, but this ability to think very literally is often the reason people are able to be experts. So to start I think it is just as important for customers and sales people to talk in expert-speak as it is for experts to learn to talk in non-expert speak. The idea that it is all on Anderson is absolutely not right. Sure, if Anderson can learn to speak fluent non-expert talk he would be an even more valuable employee to any company. But if the managers and/or customer could learn to speak expert they would also get exactly what they are looking for, and they would be more valuable in their jobs as well. So yes, as an Anderson I should work to try to understand non-expert speak, but in these situations I feel everyone is equally guilty for not speaking each other's language, so they all should be making effort (and I actually believe in this sketch they are all making an effort INCLUDING ANDERSON), and they should all be willing to forgive misunderstandings. If you ask an expert if an impossible thing is possible they are always going to say no. That's the appropriate expert response. You hired the expert for that purpose - to tell you what is possible and what is not possible. The fact that the sales people have been saying the impossible is possible and haven't been consulting the expert until this late in the process is a really bad strategy. I have worked on several things in the Anderson role, and I have learned with some teams it is literally a no-win scenario. I have tried going in and telling the truth with the hope that they will tell me what they want instead. I am not trying to be a trouble maker. I for sure am not trying to prove I am the smartest person in the room. But if something is impossible the team deserves to know that fact, and originally I didn't think it was my place to lie about that just to make them feel better. When that didn't work, I also tried the alternative that seems to be what is being suggested in this video. I suggested an alternative. The client said my alternative would work. Then I did the entire project and the client submitted my work to their experts, and their experts were livid because my project didn't meet their expectations. That is the major problem in this sketch. It is pretty clear that although the client doesn't even understand what they are asking for these requirements came from someone other than the people in the room. Also, the idea that the lines have to be perpendicular to each other I believe comes from the client when she says they need to be perpendicular "amongst themselves." Anderson wasn't the first to suggest this requirement. I would say based on what I have learned over the years that it is probably right that Anderson's first response should have been to ask more questions, specifically the "What do you imagine the end result would look like?" question. Perhaps he should ask that question before saying no, but you still have to remember that the client asked Anderson a direct question. The answer to that direct question is no. Anderson in that moment has three choices - lie and say yes, ignore the question and not answer it, or tell the truth and say no. All three of these responses could be considered unprofessional and could land him in trouble. It is a lose, lose, lose situation. As an expert, he is trained that his role is to give people truthful answers, so without additional training he believes he is providing value by answering and saying no. Perhaps it is more strategic to instead ignore the question and ask more questions. Perhaps it is also more strategic to offer alternatives before saying no. But it is also CRITICAL that before the client leaves the room that the client understands the project will not meet the original requested standards. Anderson did make an alternative suggestion, and the client did tentatively accept that alternative, but the fact that she immediately then said, "At least some with green ink," afterwards tells me as soon as they get their final project with two perpendicular red lines and 5 transparent lines they are going to come unglued because the result will not even come close to matching what they want. In this case, I believe Anderson would have done a better job if he had suggested drawing 7 intersecting red lines all with red ink.

[@hollybigelow5337]

Also, that comment about some blue and green being in red I think completely misses the point. Just because a shade of red happens to have green in it doesn't mean you can honestly say it is being drawn with green ink. You could say the line is being drawn with green ink in it, but that is not the same as drawing a red line with green ink. You still have to have at least some red ink in it to draw any red line. I do think Anderson might be able to get away in this situation with drawing all 7 lines with red ink and lying to the customer and saying he drew some of them with transparent ink and some with green and they flat out would never know differently. Or he could mix a little green and transparent ink with red ink so he doesn't feel like he is lying - but I also admit the idea of mixing in some green or transparent ink with the red ink would never have occurred to me if I had thought about it for a thousand years straight. What I personally would have done would have said I am going to try intersecting instead of parallel and try some things with the ink without specifying what and I would show them a mock-up. Then I'd go back to my office and draw a quick number of red lines in a heptagon shape all with red lines, and I would have asked them if that would work. However, the only reason I would know to try the heptagon is because the customer drew a triangle and seemed to believe those were perpendicular, so the "demonstration" would have been absolutely critical to me finding an alternative solution for the customer. I might also even do three mock ups - one with 7 red lines in a heptagon and one with 7 kittens in a heptagon, and one with 6 lines and a kitten in a heptagon. I would then submit all three and ask the customer if any of those work before doing the more intense project. However, even with all three of these choices I give it at least a 25% chance that their experts will come back and castigate me because the project didn't literally conform to the specifications that they set out. That is why it is absolutely critical to make sure in advance that the customer understands that their specifications CANNOT BE MET before they leave the room, because they are likely to walk out believing their impossible expectations are going to be met, everyone is going to spend a time and a ton of money working on the project, and after all the time and money has been wasted they are going to be way more angry at the end of the project that you weren't up front with them to begin with than they would be to learn you just can't meet their requirements. Customers that don't understand what they want are also extremely dangerous because they can be impossible to satisfy. Sales people need to understand that sometimes it really is literally impossible to provide ANY product that will satisfy some customers. That doesn't mean you don't work with them to see if you can find a way to satisfy them. But I solidly believe Anderson was open to trying to satisfy them. With practice Anderson can certainly learn to ask questions more frequently than he answers them, but honestly the fact that he is under a boss and wasn't in on the early stages of the project also mean he is probably rarely encouraged to ask questions as well. He has been trained that he role is to answer questions and otherwise be silent and stay out of the way. A good salesman early in the process would have told Anderson the requirements and would have asked, "Is this possible?" way earlier. When Anderson said no, the salesman would then have said, "Ok, well what alternatives could I suggest to the customer?" That question would have given Anderson permission to suggest alternatives, and I'm sure he would have LOVED that. Anyway, like I said I appreciate the perspective because it helps me understand the other people better. As an Anderson myself I do need to learn to maybe ask more questions before I answer even if the person asked me a very clear question that has a very clear answer of no. But at the same time I want to make it clear I do not believe at any point Anderson is trying to be difficult or is trying to show he is the smartest person in the room. Anderson is the one who has to create a practical, real life product, and he is being asked to produce a product that he knows is literally impossible to create. I promise he is open to alternatives if he can find something that is possible. I bet he even enjoys a challenge and appreciates the chance to be a bit creative. But he also knows that is not his role. In general he doesn't have permission to be creative. His job is to follow instructions, but he can't follow instructions that are either impossible or unclear. The stated instructions are impossible and the desired possible alternative is extremely unclear. I promise Anderson is just trying to get enough information that he can do a possible project that will make the customer happy. But unlike the sales team if he just gives vague platitudes and pretends to understand what is required Anderson will have a day of reckoning where he actually has to produce a real-life product that may or may not match expectations. If he matches expectations, everyone will assume their expectations were clear to begin with (even if they weren't), and everyone will be seen as heroes and as extremely competent. If the final product doesn't meet expectations, everyone else will still have the luxury of pretending they understand and of pretending what they wanted was possible, and they will all throw Anderson under the bus for failing to meet those vague or impossible expectations. Anderson is being a smart expert and is doing his best to both manage expectations and understand them now even though it is uncomfortable so he doesn't have to deal with a potential disaster later. And yet in spite of all his efforts, like I say I solidly believe his final product will not be accepted by the client because they will see only two red lines and they are expecting to see seven. Anderson has room to learn in better understanding how to both manage and understand customer expectations, but at the end of the day even if he absolutely masters that skill no one likes to be told the impossible that they have been dreaming of is impossible, but also no one likes to be told that the impossible they have been dreaming of is possible and then spend a bunch of money and time to find out it really was impossible. Anderson is often going to be put in the position where he only has those two options available to him. It's also true for everyone else in the process, but as the expert Anderson is unfortunately the only one who will ever understand when the impossible is impossible, and as a result he will always be blamed for the fact that it is impossible even if it is "geometry" that is really to blame.

[@expertdig]

@@hollybigelow5337 Holly, Thank you for your detailed criticism. Please receive my response as kindly as possible. I intend no malice, only appreciation for a subject we both seem to value. You said, "I think it is just as important for customers and sales people to talk in expert-speak as it is for experts to learn to talk in non-expert speak. The idea that it is all on Anderson is absolutely not right." Respectfully, I disagree. The burden of expert performance lies with the expert. Even the greatest experts are themselves non-experts in other domains. We cannot all be fully informed on all subjects, so I continue to believe that the burden of clarity and unity lies primarily with the expert. You said, "If you ask an expert if an impossible thing is possible they are always going to say no. That's the appropriate expert response." Again, respectfully, I disagree. I stand by my claim that experts should avoid telling customers that something is impossible. "Impossible" rarely helps the client or the expert, especially in circumstances similar to the one conveyed in this skit. Experts should seek agreement. I recognize that this position is not shared by some experts who cling tightly to clarity above all else. It is my observation, however, that negatively charged definitive statements like "no," "never," and "impossible," tend to cause more harm with customers than good. There is almost always a way to accomplish your goal without negatively charged definitive statements. You said, "You hired the expert for that purpose - to tell you what is possible and what is not possible." Sorry, again, I disagree. I believe it is a mistake for experts to think they are in meetings with customers to opine about what can and cannot be done. Experts are hired for one primary reason: to help people avoid risk. Where there is no risk there is no need for an expert. Risk justifies the contribution of experts, indeed risk justifies the existence of experts. Consequently, the work of experts should focus on customer risk. When experts focus on risk dialog becomes easier, and projects are more successful. You said, "Anderson ... has three choices - lie and say yes, ignore the question and not answer it, or tell the truth and say no." Frankly, I do not believe that clarifying a question is the same as ignoring the question. So, Anderson's strongest option is the one ignored, to clarify. I know this is simplistic, but experts are well served when they follow a pattern of asking at least three clarifying questions before making a single definitive statement. Finally, you said, "You still have to have at least some red ink in it to draw any red line." It is interesting that experts who comment on this skit tend to fixate on the rules about colors or perpendicularity. They never dig into the definition of a line. The client asked for "lines," not "line segments." By definition, a line is infinite. Regardless of the color, Anderson did not draw lines on the board, he drew line segments. My point here is not to quibble about colors or lines. My point is to encourage experts to think more creatively. Many experts are happy to ignore the text book definition of a line, but get hung up on other terms. The greatest experts I have worked with, and I have worked with many, gracefully bridge the gap between vision and reality, possibility and practicality. I appreciate your criticism and welcome the feedback of others.

[@fadingfrost2617]

I humbly needed to watch this after cracking up so much while repeatedly watching the original and making fun of the non-experts. Thanks. I should have known better. At least a tad better than I did.

[@DefiantBehavior]

At first I wanted to roast this reaction as the single worst take I have seen on this very real situation. However, the context of this being with a customer certainly requires concessions that experts must make because the goal is not to determine feasibly. Instead almost all conversation should be through the lens of discovery of the actual desired outcome which is often not what is presented. Where this situation IS toxic is in areas like product development where there are either legal, safety or other feasibility concerns being discussed during go/no-go conversations on large sum investments that should not be dismissed as “the expert must never say no”. I have seen this behavior time and again result in massive financial failures. It also creates an environment where no one feels there is any space to offer valid and valuable objection. Again, the situation I’m describing is not in a customer meeting, all of that should be focused on discovery. In any case, I at the very least appreciate the effort you put in to addressing from your perspective.