Blog

FUD is Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.  I first heard the term when consulting at Gartner.  I was working with the analysts in preparing for a Gartner Symposium, and several of them used FUD at the start of their talks to engage the listeners on an emotional level.

For instance, they might have said, “While e-mail may be the killer-app of first generation internet programs, it could very well become the mass murderer of the second generation as it hurls armies of hackers, worms, viruses and spam against the the gates of your corporate security infrastructure.”

I made that up.  But something like that.

Fear-based arguments are common and valid, in my experience.  Our lives are built around the fear of pain and the hope of gain.  Every story we have ever enjoyed in novel, play, film, or ballad is about a person who had a problem (and had FUD) and struggled to make it go away.

In fact, FUD is what makes drama dramatic.  If we don’t have FUD when the pretty young thing all alone in the house on a dark and stormy night hears a sound downstairs and gets out of bed in her nightgown to see what’s happening, then the story doesn’t work.

We have to care about the girl, and we have to be afraid that something might jump out of the closet, hatchet raised.

What if a CIO heard a noise in the middle of the night, and it was her phone, and she heard that a hacker had broken through her security system at work, the one she touted and convinced the company to buy, and she had to get dressed and drive into headquarters and face the embarrassment of a crisis that higher-ups were likely to blame on her?

Those CIOs in the audience listening to the Gartner analysts are human beings motivated by the same things that everyone else is motivated by–the fear of loss, and the hope of gain.  I’m not a CIO, but if I were, I’d be worried about making bad decisions, not looking good when my systems aren’t successful, spending too much, spending too little, and taking too much time to get things done.

We know that humans are interested in their own problems.  We talk about our problems most of the time.  They’re  number one in the conversation hit parade.  If we talk to our listeners about their problems, they are much more likely to listen.  If we demonstrate a firm grasp of their problems, and the consequences for them if they don’t solve the problems, they are more likely to respect us and trust us.  So reminding them of their problems might not be a bad strategy.

There is evidence in social science that it is not wise to use FUD arguments on people who are already in a state of high anxiety.  But there is also evidence that we retain and value information when it is linked to our emotions–any emotions, positive or negative.

Consulting is based on problem solving (i.e., the removal of FUD.)  Philosophy is built around problem solving.   Politics likewise.  For the client, the voter, the audience, beyond the FUD is a vision of a new and better reality.  But our credibility as speakers depends largely on defining, in vivid and human terms, the problem that your content solves.

Let’s not be afraid of FUD.  Used appropriately, FUD can turn a dry information dump into a compelling story about a person, a product, a department, or a company that prevents disaster and saves the day.

Michael Jendrzejczyk died at the age of 53. His obituary in the New York Times reveals a remarkable man: empathetic, principled, and, most instructive for those of us seeking to become more skillful influencers, a very effective advocate for what he believed in. His cause was human rights in Asia.

What set him apart from many advocates,” wrote Elizabeth Becker, the author of the obituary, “was his mastery of the details of his subject, as well as his network of contacts with officials, academics, and dissidents he helped protect.”

“Mr. Jendrzejczyk joked about the difficulty of pronouncing his surname, telling others not to waste their time learning to say it or spell it, but just to call him Mike J. His easy manner was partly responsible for his wide reach.” It’s pronounced jen-DREE-zick.

Susan Osnos, former Associate Director of Human Rights Watch, said he used information to promote his ideas. “Over the years, he evolved into someone who worked well in Washington, creating two-way streets that are the bread and butter of getting things done…”

When the Chinese dissident Liu Qing was released after 11 years in prison, Mr. Jendrzejczyk took him around Washington to explain to policy makers the human consequences of their votes.

He pressed Mr. Harold Koh, then an assistant secretary of state, for countless changes in foreign policy to reflect human rights concerns, but, Mr. Koh said, he was never irritated by the demands.

“You start out in a professional relationship with him and end up considering him a dear friend,” Mr. Koh said. “He was one of those happy warriors who never let you forget that you are holding a job not for personal gain but for the betterment of American policy.”

May I point out the obvious lessons for those of us who want to be more influential?
1. Master and use information to help you promote your ideas.
2. Network, mercilessly.
3. Poke fun at yourself. Cultivate an easy manner.
4. Create two-way streets with those you seek to influence.
5. Make the benefits of your ideas vivid, human, and personal.
6. Be a happy warrior for your cause.

Mr. Jendrzejczyk is survived by his wife, Janet and his sister, Lyn Ashmore. I extend to them my sympathies and trust they will approve of my use of Michael as a good role model for those of us who would like to be better advocates for our causes.