Consulting Beyond Business: Exploring Social Interactions

Ever since B school, I've been solving complex open ended business problems using logic, data and frameworks. Back then, I also loved using similar frameworks to solve and deal with simple sounding yet challenging real world non-business oriented problems. One such problem that intrigued me then was around the "Art of Conversation".

A common concern my friends/peers voiced was the inability to initiate a conversation with someone they found attractive in select social settings. I analyzed this as a fun consulting challenge and formulated a framework which helped some of my friends and tada! I turned out to be their "Pickup Consultant"(for a lack of a better word). Thought I'd just share this framework for the fun of it.

(Disclaimer: This post is not targeted at objectifying people. Strategy/Framework suggested is just an example of a mind hack)

--------------------------------------


Imagine a girl (Let's call her X) and a guy (Y) sitting across a bar. Y finds X attractive and wants to go and talk to her and see where fate leads them. However, Y is facing a roadblock.

Lack of Adequate CONFIDENCE. That's the root cause problem.

We'll be going through a framework in an attempt to solve this fundamental problem. In a consultant's language. the problem statement for the client we're solving is :

"Increase the confidence levels of the insecure not-so-confident client Y above the threshold limit required to make a move on the target X"

Before we get into this framework, there are 2 assumptions and a story that are fundamental to this solution.

Assumptions

Assumption 1. Y has the minimum threshold confidence to talk to X. (Yes, I know, that's what we're trying to solve for, but stay with me for a bit - you'll see that we'll nullify this assumption as we go along)

Assumption 2. Y will pursue X only if Y finds X interesting. With Assumption 1 in place, Y will drop pursuit of X at any point Y finds X not interesting enough.

Story

With both assumptions holding, This is a story which Y will be narrating to X. The story goes as below.

"Actually, I'm from the future. 50 years from now. In the future, I met with an wise wizard who granted me the wish to come back to any point time I wanted with all the learnings and knowledge I had till then. I asked my then life partner when and where I should come back to"

That's the story. I know it's quite abrupt/eccentric. But that's by design. Later you'll realize that you can plug in any better narrative you wish, but this story can do the job for the solution/framework, into which we'll dive in next.

The Solution | The Pickup Framework

Just to refresh, the pre-requisite for this framework is we have 2 assumptions and 1 story narrative. Since Y has the confidence to go talk to X, let's design the conversation ahead and break down all possible scenarios.

Step 1. Y approaches X. Says "Hi. I noticed you from across the table. Can I get you a drink?" or "May I join you?" etc. There are 2 possible answers here.

Step 1.A X says "Yes".

Highly unlikely response but still possible. In this scenario, Y wins the game.

Step 1.B X says "No". This is the more likely and probable scenario. Go to Step 2.

Step 2. Y says "Well. That was the answer I expected. Before I leave, I'd like to tell you something very interesting. Can you spare just 2 mins of your time?". Now, let's look at the possibilities

Step 2.A X says "No. Not interested"

Remember our Assumption 2 ? Y should drop pursuit if he finds X un-interesting. In this case, as X cannot even spare 2 mins to listen to something interesting, Y can conclude that X is not interesting enough for him. Hence, he should drop pursuit and he is better off / WINS.

Step 2.B X says "Yes. I can give you 2 mins" Now Y has an opening. This is where the story we crafted comes. Y needs to deliver the story. And at the end of it it, Y says "You know what? When I was discussing with my then life partner what point in time should I come back to, she said come to the day we first met for the first time which is why I'm here talking to you. You wanted us to save the 6 months of the cat and mouse pursuit we went through before we got together. So, yeah. Would you let me get you that drink I offered?

 There are multiple possibilities now. We explore them in Step 3.

Step 3A: X completely buys the story (probability is extremely low but possibility still exists :P which is a little concerning to be honest). She says "Yes" Y WINS

Step 3B: X feels it is indeed a very lame unrealistic story but an interesting way to make a pitch. She is interested and says "Yes". Again Y WINS

Step 3C: X feels it is a very lame story and a dumb way to make a pitch. She says "No". Before Y jumps into a conclusion on whether to pursue X further or not, Y needs to make one final attempt. So let's move onto Step 4

Step 4: Y tells X - "Ok. This was expected. I guess we'll just wait for time and destiny to naturally bring us together in 6 months. :) . I'd hate to come back again in another 50 years. You sure you don't want to grab a drink and save us both a great deal of time?"

Step 4A X says "ok. Sure. I'll let you buy me a drink". Y wins

Step 4B X says "Not interested" Coming back to our Assumption 2, now it's safe for Y to assume that if X cannot appreciate an interesting pitch, then he's better off not pursuing her further. So even in this case, Y wins!

An interesting observation you would have made is Y wins the game at every level of the process. The thought that whatever be the scenarios, "Y would always be better off "creates a confidence feedback loop which generates the necessary minimum threshold level of confidence required to make the move. Hence, our Assumption 1 that the minimum threshold confidence exists is validated

As mentioned, the crux of this solution/mindhack is not the story/narrative. It can be modified if you're able to create a better one. This is just the first story I came up with. People have used it directly. Few have modified it to suit their taste. And interestingly, most of them did not even have to use the story because the sheer thought gave them sufficient confidence to go talk to the other person. The beauty of looking at this problem this way is that you know what to think, what to do and what to say for every "No" that can possibly come from the other side. Point is that the confidence increase has happened naturally.

What happens after the conversation is initiated is outside the scope of analysis of this discussion.

Till now, we've been trying to solve the problem for Y. Let's just quickly look at what are the stances for X before wrapping up this post. In case someone comes to X with this pitch,

1. X is already committed and not interested in the conversation. X can just say "No". Y knows how to handle the "No" with the strategy discussed above. So it is a WIN WIN for both as both parties are acting in their best interest.

2. X is single and not interested. X says No during any point in the conversation. X is happy. Y is happy - Again WIN WIN

3. X is single and interested. X says Yes. Again WIN WIN for both.

Below is a flowchart of the framework discussed.

In wrapping up, let's remember: life's too short for missed connections and overlooked opportunities. Like any savvy consultant faced with a complex problem, the art of conversation demands a blend of strategy, courage, and a touch of whimsy. This approach isn't just for sparking dialogue with a stranger—it's a life hack for navigating the myriad challenges we encounter daily. By reframing our fears as opportunities for growth, we can conquer not just social anxieties but any obstacle, armed with nothing but our wits and the willingness to take that first, daring step.