What is the difference between push and pull decisions?

Push decisions are driven by avoidance — what you are trying to prevent, the downside, the smaller loss. Pull decisions are driven by approach — what you are trying to build, the upside, the bigger outcome. Both systems work, but only pull decisions compound over time.

Why does 'lesser of two evils' thinking hurt leadership?

Framing a decision as 'lesser of two evils' flips the brain into avoidance mode. The leader stops choosing a direction and starts choosing which wall to back into. Research going back to Miller and Murray (1952) shows that the avoidance gradient is steeper than the approach gradient, meaning fear outpulls desire. Leaders get paid to override that bias.

How do you flip from a push decision to a pull decision?

Ask one question before the call: 'What am I pulling toward?' If you cannot answer in a single sentence, you are in push-mode. Stop, reframe, and identify the outcome you are building toward rather than the threat you are backing away from.

Push vs Pull Leadership: Why "Lesser of Two Evils" Is Losing

"The lesser evil is still evil." - Hannah Arendt

In 1952, Miller and Murray put rats in harnesses and measured pull strength.

The rats pulled harder to escape a learned fear than they pulled toward food.

Fear outpulled desire.

Seventy years of replication later, the gradient still holds. Humans aren't rats. But the biology isn't optional - avoidance is steeper than approach.

Here's what that means at 7 AM on Monday.

You walk into a decision with two options. Neither feels great.
You frame the choice as "which one hurts less?" - and the steeper gradient kicks in.
You pull away from the bigger threat. You call it strategy. You call it prudent. You call it realistic.

You just made a push decision. Not a pull decision.

Push vs. Pull

Push decisions are driven by avoidance. What am I trying to prevent? What's the downside? Which loss is smaller?

Pull decisions are driven by approach. What am I trying to build? What's the upside? Which outcome is bigger?

Fast Company put it cleanly: the approach system engages when you pursue a desirable outcome; the avoidance system engages when you're trying to avert a calamity.

Both systems work. Only one compounds.

The Leadership Trap

When you frame every choice as "lesser of two evils," you've already surrendered the plot. You're not choosing a direction. You're choosing which wall to back into. Worse - you've accepted an assumption you never audited.

I've watched executives do this in boardrooms. I've watched incident commanders do this in the middle of disasters. The tell is always the same: the conversation orbits around what we're trying not to lose, not what we're trying to win.

That's not leadership. That's damage control in a necktie.

This is exactly where the Assumptions marker inside the TEAM Solutions Intelligent Decision System (IDS) earns its keep. Every "lesser of two evils" frame is an un-audited assumption wearing a tie - and IDS exists so you catch it before it catches you.

Flip the Frame

Before your next hard call, ask one question:

"What am I pulling toward?"

If you can't answer in a sentence, you're pushing. Stop. Reframe. Find the pull.

The rat pulls harder away from pain than toward food. That's biology.

Leaders get paid to override biology.

Source: Miller, N. E., & Murray, E. J. (1952). Displacement and conflict; learnable drive as a basis for the steeper gradient of avoidance than of approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43(3), 227–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0053532

Lesser of Two Evils? You’re Already Losing.