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 )

Ushering in a New Voice in Fiction

Anandajit Goswami stands among the most distinguished Indian authors of contemporary times, and with his latest novel Siddharth – The Soul Seeker, he once again proves his remarkable ability to engage and move readers. A writer deeply committed to his craft, Goswami continuously transforms his imagination into compelling works across the spectrum of fiction. Siddharth – The Soul Seeker is a profound novel that traces a spiritual and existential journey, set against the emotionally charged backdrop of India’s Partition.


With remarkable sensitivity and restraint, the novel recreates a world steeped in intense human emotions. It vividly portrays the anguish of displacement, the trauma of Partition, and the deep psychological alienation endured by the protagonist, Siddharth. The narrative sheds light on the inner turmoil of a young boy whose life is torn apart by violence and loss, yet shaped by compassion and hope.


Siddharth is introduced as an ordinary child caught in extraordinary circumstances, scarred by the brutality and bloodshed of communal conflict. In a powerful testament to humanity, he is lovingly raised by a kind-hearted Muslim woman, highlighting the endurance of compassion even amid chaos and hatred. His later love for, and marriage to, a Hindu woman reinforces the novel’s central message of harmony and unity between communities divided by violence. Through these relationships, Goswami underscores the timeless values of empathy, coexistence, and shared humanity.


Rich in psychological depth, the novel reflects unsettling truths that resonate strongly with contemporary readers. Indian audiences, in particular, find an immediate connection with the situations portrayed, as the narrative articulates the existential dilemmas that haunt individuals throughout their lives. Driven by questions of identity, purpose, and existence, Siddharth embarks on a transformative journey across India, engaging with its diverse cultures, faiths, and spiritual traditions.


This journey ultimately leads to a gripping courtroom drama, where the mysteries surrounding Siddharth’s identity and life purpose seek resolution. Holding the reader’s attention till the very end, the novel thoughtfully explores themes of survival, cultural plurality, spiritual awakening, and self-discovery. Thematically rich and emotionally layered, the book leaves a lasting impact.


While many contemporary writers prioritize plot over character, often at the cost of emotional depth, Goswami adopts a different approach. He displays a deep awareness of his characters’ needs, crafting them with care and authenticity. Siddharth, in particular, emerges as a fully realized protagonist upon whose shoulders the narrative structure firmly rests. The novel’s well-organized plot does not follow rigid, classical conventions but remains deeply introspective and psychologically engaging.


Goswami’s storytelling aligns closely with Aristotle’s principles of probability and relatability in characterization. His characters feel real—like individuals one might encounter in everyday life. Their struggles, emotions, and moral dilemmas are portrayed with such conviction that they compel readers and critics alike to reflect deeply upon them.


The author’s language is simple, clear, and accessible, yet the ideas conveyed are profound and contemplative. This balance between clarity and depth makes Siddharth – The Soul Seeker an exceptional work of fiction. It is a novel that lingers in the mind long after the final page and is, without doubt, a book that deserves to be read.


(The writer is a literary critic. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page