Removing indecision
We’re going through a major fundraising drive at the moment and one of the questions I really need to find an answer for is “Why should we give you any money?” Funders – be they charitable foundations, rich benefactors or banks – understandably need to know there’s a need for what we’re doing.To me the need is clear. I spend an inordinate amount of time online reading what other people think. I think other people do the same. If they’re like me they’ll find making sense of all the different opinions time-consuming, imprecise and pretty damn frustrating. They’ll want a better way.
But how do you quantify this? Does it really matter if people are undecided? Or rather, how much does it matter? A look around the internet has revealed self-help gurus talking about the damage of indecision but there are no studies which measure the actual effect.
Right then. Plan B. Go local. Examine events in my life to determine how indecision affects me and see if there are any broader lessons to be learned. The first example I can think of is the indecision about getting Marley detesticulised. It’s a grim, but important, decision and one I’ve been wrestling with for the best part of five years now.
On the face of it, the 'lose them arguments are overwhelming. 1) The zero sum game – there are enough pups in the world, making more means others wont get rescued. 2) Health – testicleless dogs are less likely to suffer from prostrate cancer or testicular cancer, plus they’re less likely to get run over by cars on their headlong quest toward that bitch in heat. 3) General wellbeing – he’d be less of a target for other intact alpha males and would be less frustrated by the sheer number of dogs who aren’t in heat. Plus he’s not likely to get it often, wouldn’t getting it once be worse than not getting it at all?
The keep them arguments are much more intangible. There’s the fear his personality might change or, worse, something might happen in the operation. There’s the concern something might happen to him in the world and that his offspring would allow him to live on. Plus, I think there should be more dogs in the world like Marley. He is what evolution was made for.
So clearly what we’ve got here is classic case of logic trumping, largely irrational, fear. The For reasons make a lot of sense, the Against reasons are anxiety based (I’m sure every dog owner thinks theirs is the best). This kind of fear will always beat logic since the fact it is irrational makes it impervious to rational thought.
Since the arguments can’t be convincing perhaps the consequences will do the trick. The consequences for him are essentially a less happy life. All he does when meeting dogs is sniff to see if they’re available. He’s not interested in playing, just mounting. And he seems not to care their sex or their age. I think he’s desperate poor thing.
The consequences for me are a less happy dog with a less long life. Which considering how important he is to me should be consequence enough. My inability to decide, to actually pick up the phone and book that appointment, is not good for him and it’s not good for me.