I haven't reviewed a book in quite some time. Primarily because I simply don't have much time these days, and what time I have is spent reading up on being highly sensitive or a visual-spatial learner. And there's only so much room for non-fiction in my life. But I digress.
I signed up for this particular review because 10-10-10 was described as a "life-transforming" decision-making model. Seeing as how we're awash in crucial decisions in the Uncommon household, I signed up.
Right off the bat, I was inclined to like the book because the author, Suzy Welch, looks a whole helluva lot like a good friend and favorite client. And I wasn't disappointed. The book's intro is possibly one of the best I've read in non-fiction: engaging, funny, with a strong voice and personal connection.
"...[my father] taught me how to parallel-park in that way people do when they are engineers in their souls and understand physics in their brains, and are teaching people who are writers in their souls and understand poetry in their brains. We laugh about it today."
The book is, in fact, one part biography, one part personal interviews of others, and one part how-to. She weaves the three nicely, and both her stories and those of her followers (for lack of a better word) serve as illustrations of the basic tenets of 10-10-10.
Which is this: Consider any decision - be it big, small, or somewhere in between - from the perspective if the immediate future (10 minutes), mid-range (10 months), and long-term (10 years). Those time references are merely symbolic, and handy in the mnemonic sense. And you should make those considerations around your well-thought-out, identified values.
It's really a simple process. Welch walks you through her personal break-through that led to the 10-10-10 process, and some of the neuro- and behavioral science behind it. On the whole, I think 10-10-10 is a good, solid process that eliminates some of our snap decisions and general thoughtlessness that results from our over-done lifestyles.
But I did have a few minor disagreements. The biggest was her repeated assertion that "gut instinct" is largely unreliable as a decision-making tool. I think the rub here is that we disagree about what qualifies as gut instinct. I believe that what Welch refers to as "gut" is actually impulse. And I would agree that impulse doesn't always lead to great decision-making.
When I refer to gut instinct, I'm talking about somethign else: an assessment of factors too numerous to describe that leads you to a conclusion that, while you cannot describe it, is nonetheless fact-based and quite often, reliable. True gut instinct (also called "intuition") is persistent. It doesn't change from minute to minute because it is based on the myriad of non-verbal, environmental, and other "soft" cues that we consistently gather from our surroundings. Years ago I read The Gift of Fear, which describes this in much better detail. Simply put, it's that nagging feeling that tells you "somethings wrong here" or "somethings right", "but I just can't put my finger on why".
But people do conflate the two - impulse and true intuition. And I think Welch's point that our impulses get in the way of sound decisions is valid.
Another minor peeve was an overuse of examples. The concept really is quite simple and elegant, and after more than two stories to illustrate how it works within a particular area (work, parenting, relationships, friendships) I began to get that, "yeah, yeah, yeah - got it." feeling.
And finally, I kept running into a problem that may or may not be specific to me: my deftness at playing devil's advocate. For the immediate future scenario, I always felt confident. For the mid-range, well, so-so. But then, more often than not, the long-term scenario opened up into a great vast field of "could be this, could be that, could be the other," or worse, a giant floating question mark because of a dearth of information.
Even if I managed to ferret out a possible scenario, I would then say to myself, "sure, but what about this," just to argue the point, and I'd turn the whole thing on it's head. Still, even my stubbornness can be subjugated to good-'ol common sense.
Let's take our decision to sell our house as an example:
First we form the question: Should we sell our house? In the next ten minutes, the implications are not to promising on either side: I'd feel a great deal of loss and no small amount of failure if we sold it. Conversely, the potential relief at unloading the debt would feel liberating, healthy, and like a good course-correction.
Now, for the mid-range: Ten months out, we would hope the house has sold. We've cut our monthly payments in half, and have a little in the bank for emergencies. OR, the house hasn't sold, and we're either in foreclosure or declaring bankruptcy. Lots of floating question marks here.
Finally, the long-term: Ten years from now, surely the economy has recovered and Todd and I are both gainfully employed. We're living in a different house somewhere and the girls are bordering their teenage years. If we sold the house and managed to pay off our remaining debt, we could feasibly live in a house we own. If we had to declare bankruptcy, we would have had a hard time qualifying to rent a place, let alone buy one, but our credit should have recovered by now.
Based on this, our decision to sell seems like the right one. It's the long-term that clenches the deal. But you can see how tempting it is for my mind to trot out the laundry list of what-ifs.
To sum it up, I really like the book and her model. It's an easy, engaging read and I think that you could incorporate 10-10-10 into your everyday life without too much effort, and turn to it explicitly when the giant issues come around. Being deliberate, analyzing your values, and starting open dialogues with the imiportant people in your life is ALWAYS a good thing, and I think Welch is onto an simple plan for doing just that.