Those Bloody Dots

I didn’t know what it was. In the glass it kinda looked like port wine. So that was my mindset when I tasted it. It has deep cherry like flavours, sweet but still has a distinct freshness. With 18% ABV it also has a bit of umpf. It looked like a Duck, it walked like a Duck but it Quacked like VanDenBeld Pinot - Rouge.

As a SAP FiCo consultant you grow in the ability to recognise situations and problems. During the verbal dance with the customer I’m penciling in the contours with each move and sway. At the end of the dance I’ve refined the contours and traced the outline from dot-to-dot.? Not only have I created a picture in my mind, I’m simultaneously anchoring possible approaches and solutions to those recognisable dots. It’s all based on pattern recognition. Familiarity with clients and situations that are similar although never the same.

In my consultants mind I’m trying to see if there’s a correlation between what I’ve experienced before. Since no two clients and situations are the same the correlation will never be 100%. My assessment, approaches and solutions will always need to be adapted to the current situation. The stronger the correlation the smaller the adaptation. This is more an art than a science and therein lies the risk.

It took me not one, not two, but three sips of the Pinot before my brain could recognise what my tastebuds already did. This is not port. This is something different. Why did it take me three sips? My brain is so trained in connecting dots that when they don’t I’m confused and think? that something is off because they should connect.

This is when I realised that familiarity easily hides new variants of a situation. That there’s an inherent bias in the act of pattern matching. I’m looking for a match with past solutions and situation so I’m more inclined to find a match. A discussion about a customer aging report may trigger recognition of reports I’ve done in the past. But that familiarity may blind me for the root cause that there are unclear payment terms printed on the customer invoice. The net result would exact the same as before. Customers not paying on time. Only now with a very nice report that shows that.

Every day I need to ask myself if there’s an actual pattern to recognise. It’s a bit like asking people for their top three requirements. Then you’ll get three answers. You get three because you asked for three. Pattern matching is the same. I may think I’ve found a pattern because I’m looking for a pattern. Perhaps this happens because pattern recognition is looking for a mold that fits the current situation.? In order for the situation to fit any mold I need to make some generalisations.

This is one of the reasons why I’m always interested in the ‘why’ of the requirements. The client says they need a customer aging reports. Okay, that’s great. Why do you need it? That way I could check if I’ve correctly identified a pattern or not

But equally important is asking myself the ‘why’ questions. When I conclude that a certain report is the solution. Is it actually the solution or do I want to apply this solution because it’s fresh in my mind? In that case I am actively looking for the pattern that needs the cool report I created for a previous client. You have a solution? Okay, that’s great. Why is it a solution? As experienced as I am with this pattern recognition I’ve become more-and-more aware that it’s more an art form than a science. A balancing act between trusting your ability to recognise patterns and my bias in recognising patterns.

Just when I tasted the Pinot for the first time. I thought I recognised it for something I knew. But I was wrong. I thought I recognised it. But I didn’t.? And once I realized that Pinot was Pinot, then I could enjoy it for what is was. Sweet wine that screams for chocolate one time and at other times begs to dance with it’s sparkling sister VanDenBend Brut. They Kirr, with joy as only wines can do.

Till next time.

The traveler checks each milestones to ensure reaching the intended destination.