Why cognitive sympathy is the secret weapon that increases the sharpening of executive decisions

Cognitive sympathy may seem a soft skill, but Christine Barton calls it one of the most difficult march. Boston Consulting Group and the main partner determines that she does not feel the feelings of another person, but understands their point of view – seeing context, pressures and biases that constitute how others interpret the world. “It is an active curiosity,” she says. “You get to know their point of view without the need to oppose their feelings.”

Leadership patterns swing between leadership, control and the most humanitarian curricula swing, but Barton argues today’s volatility-political trauma, rapid technological change, and “uncertainty in land cards” such as epidemics or climatic crises-the necessary cognitive sympathy. Once the executives reach the top, you notice that they are often working in a bubble. “The people around you compete with the type of information that you interact with well and start feeding you more than that, and what you interact with them negatively, they start to feed you less.” The practice of cognitive sympathy “penetration of the bubble” and forces the leaders to search for various inputs of risk weight and opportunities.

This does not mean giving up the condemnation. Even while listening carefully, interrogation bias, and adapting their understanding, leaders must maintain a clear view. Cognitive sympathy aims to enhance government, not to replace it with an endless compatibility. Barton cites the idea of ​​former CEO of Revlon Jacques Stal on “applicable view”, which is “deliberate, intended, based on a set of principles”, but it is open to the challenge. “It strengthens the decision and the story you tell,” says Barton.

Crisis communication is the place where the skill is vital. When the risks and emotions are high, each message is examined. Cognitive sympathy helps leaders expect how employees, investors and clients perceive the situation and allocating interpretations so that each audience feels understandable. “It is not about telling different stories,” says Barton. “All these things are coherent and integrated, but you confirm different aspects on the basis of the public.”

Some fear of sympathy slows the decisions, but Barton does not agree. “You still have a point of view,” she says. “But you must be actively, challenge your own biases and seek really to get deep inputs instead of formulating this perspective alone.”

It is also a skill that anyone can build. Barton recommends providing unpopular attention, asking investigation questions, or holding groups to exchange weaknesses, building confidence as monitoring, or conducting experiments to learn how the difference responds. The method is less important than a mentality. “There is no single way to do the cognitive sympathy that anyone should say,” well, this does not feel it is authentic to me, “she says.