top of page

By:

Rashmi Kulkarni

23 March 2025 at 2:58:52 pm

Loss Aversion Is Why Your Good Idea Fails

Your upgrade is their loss until you prove otherwise. Last week, Rahul wrote about a simple truth: you’re not inheriting a business, you’re inheriting an equilibrium. This week, I want to talk about the most common reason that equilibrium fights back even when your idea is genuinely sensible. Here it is, in plain language: People don’t oppose improvement. They oppose loss disguised as improvement. When you step into a legacy MSME, most things are still manual, informal, relationship-driven....

Loss Aversion Is Why Your Good Idea Fails

Your upgrade is their loss until you prove otherwise. Last week, Rahul wrote about a simple truth: you’re not inheriting a business, you’re inheriting an equilibrium. This week, I want to talk about the most common reason that equilibrium fights back even when your idea is genuinely sensible. Here it is, in plain language: People don’t oppose improvement. They oppose loss disguised as improvement. When you step into a legacy MSME, most things are still manual, informal, relationship-driven. People have built their own ways of keeping work moving. It’s not perfect, but it’s familiar. When you introduce a new system, a new rule, a new “professional way,” you may be adding order but you’re also removing something  they were using to survive. And humans react more strongly to removals than additions. Behavioral economists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky called this loss aversion where we feel losses more sharply than we feel gains. That’s why your promised “future benefit” struggles to compete with someone’s immediate fear. Which seat are you stepping into? Inherited seat:  People assume you’ll change things quickly to “prove yourself”. They brace for loss even before you speak. Hired seat:  People watch for hidden agendas: “New boss means new rules, new blame.” They protect themselves. Promoted seat:  Your peers worry the old friendship is now replaced by authority. They fear loss of comfort and access. Different seats, same emotion underneath: don’t take away what keeps me safe. Weighing Scale Think of an old kirana shop. The weighing scale may not be fancy, but it’s trusted. The shopkeeper has used it for years. Customers have seen it. Everyone has settled into that comfort. Now imagine someone walks in and says, “We’re upgrading your weighing scale. This is digital. More accurate. More modern.” Sounds good, right? But what does the shopkeeper hear ? “My customers might think the old scale was wrong.” (loss of trust) “I won’t be able to adjust for small realities.” (loss of flexibility) “If the digital scale shows something different, I’ll be accused.” (loss of safety) “This was my shop. Now someone else is deciding.” (loss of control) So even if the new scale is better, the shopkeeper will resist or accept it politely and quietly return to the old one when nobody is watching. That is exactly what happens in companies. Modernisation Pitch Most leaders pitch change like this: “We’ll become world-class.” “We’ll digitize.” “We’ll improve visibility.” “We’ll build a process-driven culture.” But for the listener, these are not benefits. These are threats, because they translate into losses: Visibility can mean exposure . Process can mean loss of discretion . Digitization can mean loss of speed  (at least initially). “Professional” can mean loss of status  for the old guard. So the person across the table is not debating your logic. They’re calculating their losses. Practical Way Watch what happens when you propose something simple like daily reporting. You say: “It’s just 10 minutes. Basic discipline.” They hear: “Daily reporting means daily scrutiny.” “If numbers dip, I will be questioned.” “If I show the truth, it will create conflict.” “If I don’t show the truth, I’ll be accused later.” In their mind, the safest response is: nod, agree, delay. Then you label them “resistant.” But they’re not resisting change. They’re resisting loss . Leader’s Job If you want adoption in an MSME, don’t sell modernization as “upgrade”. Sell it as protection . Instead of: “We need an ERP.” Try: “We need to stop money leakage and order confusion.” Instead of: “We need systems.” Try: “We need fewer customer escalations and less rework.” Instead of: “We need transparency.” Try: “We need fewer surprises at month-end.” This is not manipulation. This is translation. You’re speaking the language the system understands: risk, leakage, blame, customer loss, cash loss, fatigue. Field Test: Rewrite your pitch in loss-prevention language Pick one change you’re pushing this month. Now write two versions: Version A (your current pitch): What you normally say: upgrade, modern, efficiency, best practices. Version B (loss prevention pitch): Use this template: What are we losing today?  (money, time, customers, reputation, peace) Where is the leakage happening?  (handoffs, approvals, rework, vendor delays) What small protection will this change create? (fewer disputes, faster closure, less follow-up) What will not change?  (no layoffs, no humiliation, no sudden policing) What proof will we show in 2 weeks?  (one metric, one visible win) Now do one more important step: For your top 3 stakeholders, write the one loss they think they will face  if your change happens. Don’t argue with it. Just name it. Because once you name the fear, you can design around it. The close If you remember only one thing from this week, remember this: A “good idea” is not enough in a legacy MSME. People need to feel safe adopting it. You don’t have to dilute your standards. You just have to stop selling change like a TED talk and start selling it like a protection plan. Next week, we’ll deal with another invisible force that keeps companies stuck even when they agree with you: the status quo isn’t a baseline. It’s a competitor. (The writer is CEO of PPS Consulting, can be reached at rashmi@ppsconsulting.biz )

Beyond Ritual: The Science of Muhurata and Choghadiya

In Vedic science, auspicious and inauspicious have little to do with divine approval and everything to do with energy cycles shaped by planetary movement.

In my previous article, I discussed Hora and the movement of planets as understood through the concept of Varas. Building on that foundation, I had indicated that I would next turn to Muhurata and Choghadiya, two time-selection concepts that play an equally important role in traditional astrological practice.


Since time immemorial, we have been told that certain Muhuratas are auspicious while others are inauspicious. The same holds true for Choghadiya. Over generations, these classifications have been accepted almost unquestioningly, despite many debates and challenges to the rationale behind why a particular time period is considered suitable or unsuitable for a specific activity.

Before delving into the science behind this, it is important to clarify that in Vedic science, the concepts of auspicious and inauspicious are rooted in energy cycles and the influence of celestial bodies, not divine approval. Just as tides respond to the Moon and hormones to the Sun, these time periods are understood for their energetic impact rather than superstition.


According to Vedic science, a day is systematically divided into several time units: 3,600 Vighatis of 24 seconds each, 60 Ghatis of 24 minutes each, 24 Horas of one hour each, 30 Muhuratas of 48 minutes each, and 15 Choghadiyas of 96 minutes each.


'Muhurata' (or 'Muhurta') in Sanskrit means 'muhu' (moment) and 'rta' (cosmic order). Nowhere does it talk about God or Divine power. We all have heard about Brahma Muhuratas, which start 96 minutes before sunrise. As per Vedic science, it is considered to be the best time for self-growth, exercise, yoga and learning. As per modern science, that’s the time of atmospheric purity with the presence of nascent oxygen – a single atom of oxygen that is highly reactive and can easily combine with haemoglobin. Other Muhuratas during the day are Abhijit, Amrut, Shubh, Laabh, Kaal, Rog and Udveg.


Choghadiya is the 96-minute cycle, which, as per the Vedas, is important for our daily actions. Again, this is determined by the planetary movement.


The first Chogadiya (which starts at sunrise) is based on the ruler of that Hora. So the first Chogadiya of Sunday is ruled by the Sun. Various Choghadiyas are Udveg (Sun), Amrut (Moon), Rog (Mars), Laabh (Mercury), Shubh (Jupiter), Chal (Venus), and Kaal (Saturn). The sequence of Choghadiyas is the same as Hora – the ascending order of the relative orbital speed of planets to Earth – Saturn (Shani), Jupiter (Guru), Mars (Mangal), Sun (Ravi), Venus (Shukra), Mercury (Buddha), and Moon (Som).


Is it just a coincidence that the satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) are programmed to orbit around Earth in 90-100 minutes? The International Space Station orbits around the Earth in 93 minutes. LEO Satellite is for Earth Observation and Remote Sensing and is responsible for gathering images for weather forecasting, crop health and disaster management. And the reason for it to be programmed at 93 minutes is that, as per modern science, that's the timeframe in which there is a material difference observed from Earth images. And Vedic science says that things change with every Chogadiya.


One more interesting fact – the position of Earth moves by 23.5 degrees at the end of every Chogadiya; 23.5 degrees is the angle of the Earth’s tilt on its axis, 23.5 degrees is the Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn, and 23.5 degrees is the distance of the polar circles from the poles. And as we have seen in the article on 108, the universe is very well synchronised.


To reiterate, our ancestors described Muhurata and Choghadiya as auspicious or inauspicious based on their understanding of energy cycles generated by planetary movements and their influence on life on Earth, rather than mere ritual or belief.


It is not that one cannot cross a river by rowing against the current; it is certainly possible. However, when the current is understood and one rows in harmony with it, the crossing becomes faster, smoother, and far less challenging.


(The writer is Founder and CEO of Beehive Capital Advisors Private Limited. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page