Pushkin. I have a friend named Dan. I've known him for years. He's in his seventies, lives outside Washington, d C. He's in the crisis communications business. Companies call him in when they have a big problem. In fact, that's how I met him. I was working on a story about one of his cases and he called me up. Dan and I talk all the time. And last of all, he said something to me in passing about having to go for a bunch of tests. He didn't say why. It didn't seem like a big deal.
The last many my internest told me that he was pretty sure I had probably cancer, and for me, it was a I can't say it was a nothing reaction, but it was certainly a very modest reaction. I said to him, isn't this a minor league cancers? And isn't it a write of passage if you're a man my age? And that's how I thought about it, And it was reinforced when I would connected with the urologist who said to me anytime in the next few months, have an MRI. So I thought of it as a minor thing, and
my first contact with my expert reinforced that. So I didn't even bother to do anything until August. From May to August, and I go a blood test, to an MRI, to a biopsy, to a pet scan, and then it was, yeah, you got it. And then the next deal was you should just go and get some radiation and some hormone therapy, and it was and I had to draw it out of the physician and it was a casual matter of fact, and that was sort of dumped in my lap at that point.
But at a certain point something nagged at him. He wasn't sure why, since everything thus far had been straightforward, so he started calling around.
But as I was going through it, because of my work and friends, I've had lots of health clients and education clients, as you know, I asked somebody just to look at it to make sure there wasn't something. And I was even embarrassed and hesitant to ask because I thought it's such a minor problem. It felt like an imposition.
And my friend wanted to do it, and I was even hesitant and reluctant, and a doctor which I will name doctor Master Emory, looked at it and said, you have a big problem, and you have an urgent problem, and it was like that and he said, if you were my patient, I would have had you in my surgical suite last week, but you have an urgent matter.
My name is Malcolm Gladwell. You're listening to Revisionist History, my podcast about things overlooked and misunderstood. This episode, where we explore how and when trust decisions are made, is sponsored by PayPal Open, Trusted by consumers, built for all business for over twenty five years, they've been at the forefront of commerce, helping merchants of all sizes grow. So wherever a commerce moves next, you can rest assured PayPal Open has your back. Head to paypalopen dot com to
learn more. Over several episodes, we'll dive into the topic of trust, where it comes from, the moment it's earned, and how we decide who to trust or not. And I wanted to start with the story of my friend Dan, who, out of the blue one day was told that a problem he thought was routine was actually threatening his life. And you had to decide, under the most emotionally overwhelming circumstances imaginable, who to trust.
He looked at my files, looked at my data, and said, you have a big proble. And he said others will tell you that you don't, but I'm telling you you do.
One of the many interesting things about Dan is that if I told you his full name and you googled him, almost nothing would come up. He doesn't advertise, he doesn't give interviews, he doesn't go to fancy gaullas. There are no pictures of him anywhere. He's almost invisible. But in the very rarefied world of Fortune five, when the companies and CEOs and political big wigs, everyone knows Dan because he's the guy you call when you have a problem you don't know how to deal with.
For the past nearly forty years I have lived. That's what I referred to as the intersection of bad luck and bad judgment. I help people who have managed to get themselves into really serious trouble. The kind of trouble that is career defining, can be threatening to the existence of a business, brings a level of scrutiny from the Justice Department or Congress or media that is inescapable, usually to borrow the words of Fank Williams. These are folks who see their name at the top of the.
Page and you are you're not going to blow your run horn. But literally, like if some big shot person gets in trouble, you're like tak Ghostbusters. It's like Dan gets the call. You get the first call A so, as I could tell, for.
The last twenty five thirty years, I get the call.
Yeah.
And there have been many times where I will see a story break and I'm automatically processing it, reacting what do I think? What do I think is going on? And in the back of my mind, I'm thinking I might get a call. In many cases, I do get a call. And whether it's the General Motors bankruptcy, or the Paterno Penn State case, or the BP oil spill, the Equifax data breach, you know, either limited what I can say about what I did, but I get the call.
Now, why do you Let's talk about this in the context of trust. So you've spent your life walking into boardrooms, executive suites, what have you to talk to people who, in most cases you have never met before? Right, so people just know you by reputation. Why do they trust you?
It's an interesting thing. I've thought about it sometimes because I've wondered about misplaced trust. The genuine trust comes through the process. It isn't in the beginning. It's hope, and its panic and it's fear, and they've been told by somebody that they do trust. This is the guy you need. They know they're in such a difficult spot, they don't know where to turn. They are desperate to find somebody
who can help them. You know. An irony for me in my medical situation is I used to say to clients sort of jokingly, that I'm a urologist and that I'm the person you don't really want to see. But when you need to see, there isn't anything more important You want to see that neurologists and you want that problem solved. There is a sense of urgency that is focusing in a way that nothing else matters. And then
I end up in this situation needing my urologists. But it is what I What I know is they know quickly if they can trust me. M hm. They can tell your tone, the first things you say are so critically important. The manner, your style, your sense of confidence, all those things communicate absolutely instantly. People are processing is this a person in my in the most critical situation of my career? Should I give them time? Should I give them face? Should I pay attention?
To what they're saying, and what is it in that moment?
Are you?
If you had to summarize as simply as possible, what you're bringing to them in that moment, what is it?
It's a good question. It's a hard question because, as I've explained, I will be the least knowledgeable person in any room I'm in, and partly it's because I'm in the rooms on calls, in meetings, in boardrooms with people who are phenomenally experienced, capable, educated, credentialed leading scientists, engineers, MBAs, lawyers, CEOs, board chairs, tremendously accomplished people, and they have a world
of advisors around them. They don't lack for counsel in health counsel and the communications front, marketing, legal, outside advisors, business consultants. So what do I bring. I don't have any of those credentials. I bring a depth of experience of being in truly, truly difficult situations hundreds of times where the stakes are so big and the pressure is so great. I think if I have a particular skill,
it is synthesizing, clarifying. I hope and believe that I bring a common sense perspective to it, which relates to the clarity, and I want to help them prioritize what they're doing and how they're processing it. And then inevitably I'm involved in what do you say about it? What do you say? Who says it, when do you say it?
How do you communicate that? And that It can sound easy, but then you've got all the technical aspects, the factual side of that, You've got the legal considerations, the regulatory considerations, and all those pressures are there. How can you help them fight through that and get them to say something that real people can understand. There's an honesty and an integrity and a value to it.
In a meeting with a client, have you ever raised your voice? No, you do have speaking of why it is people trust you. You do radiate a kind of calm and there's something dispassionate about the way you see the world. And I imagining you're doing the people who are often highly emotional.
Oh, I mean, I'm in a room where there's always there's lots of screaming, there's jockeying. People are desperate to sort of seeking an advisory role. Others are trying to get out of it. There are people who are trying to take credit, and there are people trying to lay blame, and there's just tremendous emotion. You know, when I what I know, I'll just tell you if it's a few
things I really have never talked about. I need to get to a point where the CEO will tell me anything, and I mean tell me the personal side, because the the personal emotional toll of these things is never really factored in and it plays a huge part in what they're going through. So I I it's not as much what I say is what I hear. I want I want them to feel if they read some point where they want to truly confide in me, that I know
I'm going to play a role. The other thing that I know is it is absolutely essential for me to be candid in my very first conversations, really candid. So you mentioned earlier about do you tell them how bad it is? In a sense I do. I'm not telling them something they don't know, but I want them to know two things that I have a sense of the situation without all the factual command that they have. I have a sense of it, and that I am going
to be absolutely direct with them. I'm not trying to shock I'm not trying to make them feel worse, but I'm unafraid to tell them what I think. And that's absolutely and those first literally, those first conversations, it's it's critical to your role.
So you go and see doctor Master, and the tables are turned. Dan had become the client, the person in a state of emotional distress and confusion talking to a stranger and trying to decide whether to trust him. We'll be right back. This is fascinating with Dan because you are in a moment. There's a moment here when you start to treat this problem you're having in the same
way that you actually said this to me. There was a moment when I started to treat this problem I understood this was no different from the problems I deal with in my work.
Yeah, that's when this whole thing turned.
Do you when do you have that sense of oh, this is something I've been doing my whole life.
Well, so doctor Master is telling me I have a serious problem, that it needs to be addressed, and that I need surgery, but he's not the one to do it. Then I followed up and I talked to two surgeons who said to me, surgeries out of the question can't be done, and that my problem was a lot more complicated, a lot more advanced.
And now the script is flipped. Have changed dramatically. We've gone from doctors shrugging to doctor saying it's so bad, we don't even think we can do surgery right. And when they say that, so, what are they telling you? Your options are at that moment.
That you're gonna need other all the treatments that are available. And they kept saying, Malcolm, it's a very interesting thing, because you know, I pay again. It was my instincts. I listen to exactly what they're saying and the way they say it, in the order in which they're saying it. The first thing they would say to me is we can keep you alive. And that was meant as a reassuring message. And it wasn't not because I feared death, but because I thought they thought that I feared death.
And what I was worried about was quality of life more than length of life. And consistently it was about we're going to keep you alife. We can keep you alive, and then it was but surgery is not an option, you're too far gone, And then it was a radiation extensive hormones the rest of my life in chemotherapy, and an ordeal that would be I'm looking grateful for anything
but exceedingly unpleasant, a life that was tremendously compromised. So I talked to these surgeons and their language was One surgeon said, oh, oh no, no, no, no, no no. Immediately after he told me, you know you can say alive you don't want the surgery, he said, I I would be I would not want to do it, but he said, I'll do it if you want me to. And I don't, you know, but he literally said, I'll do it if you if you really want me to. And you know, no one of course is thinking of that.
A second surgeon that I talked to kept saying, and I'm not exaggerating, I think he said it. I made notes seven times in my I had a video chat with him. He said, it's at least ninety percent that I will not be successful, and he said it's probably below. It's probably single digits to have any chance of success here. And he was so worried that I wasn't hearing that. He kept repeating it over and over and over again.
So after I talked to them, I talked to another doctor who said to me, finally the magical messy for me, which is, you're the only one who can figure out what to do here, Dan, the doctors can figure this out for you. And I immediately understood what that meant, and I was immediately comfortable. I thought, I distress. Interestingly, the challenge was great, but the stress receded. I thought,
I know this, I know exactly what he's saying. What did he mean, Not that I had been talking to incompetent doctors, not that I was getting bad advice can argue about the elements of it, but that it is a problem that doesn't have necessarily obvious, clear advice attached
to it. That what no one had said, but which I figured out the tests are not clear, they're not definitive, they're not perfect, and that the science is incredibly complicated, and that I could get extremely accomplished people from different fields on collegists, pathologists, surgeons looking at this and they could legitimately come to a wide range of different views. I thought, I've lived my life in that room. I know what that means.
So what was your next step?
Wait?
At the moment he says that so that's the moment where you say, Okay, I've been here before.
No, I know another deal.
He was in a crisis, and what had he spent his entire life doing solving crises? What was a change in your perspective of that moment? Did you?
So? You said, had you tremendous comfort?
Yeah?
It was. It was. I am one hundred percent confident and comfortable making this decision myself, not because I thought I would be perfect or that I knew more than the doctors. I knew that I didn't, but that I knew the right process to go through to arrive at the best conclusion I could arrive at, and I have. It was. It was a tremendous calming experience for me. But I was blessed because of this experience. Nothing I'd ever planned on, nothing I would have ever thought about
when I started this. But I've been through it dozens and dozens and dozens of times on incredibly complicated, high stakes issues, careers, billions of dollars, and that I had a network of people that I could call on for perspective, so I knew I would get good advice. So I just from that moment, I just said, this is my newest case assignment.
First trust was misplaced trust. Second trust stage was you can trust yourself. I Dan can trust myself on this.
I can trust myself in this process.
So he started over doing exactly the thing he always does when he takes on a new case. He read everything there was to read. He went through his medical records with a fine tooth comb, flagging the things that he didn't understand or that needed clarification. He was guided by one of the foundational principles of his work. First facts are always wrong, always wrong, always wrong, always wait.
Describe explain that a little bit, because it's super relevant here, because in your case, the first facts are wrong, wrong, wrong. Why are first facts wrong?
Well, it's the kind of thing you know. I had to learn through experience. Again, you're in a room. You're brilliant doctors, brilliant engineers, m b as, fabulous lawyers outside counts you would and so when they're telling you something, you believe it. You're based on their credibility, their integrity, their experience. The problem is where did they get what they know? In a crisis. It's coming too fast? How's
it being processed? How thorough is it? How much can you know, and how's it being interpreted, Who's interpreted And sometimes there could be some obvious bias. Sometimes there's unintentional a bias. But what I always know is you don't have it all. What you think you have part of it's wrong and you need to be extremely careful decisions you're making based on those facts and what you're saying, because you're going to be reversing some of those decisions.
You're going to be eating some of those words. And Malcolm, I never even thought about that. In my case. I did what all my clients do. Well, I've got serious lap tests, I've got an important experienced doctor, I've got other experts who have looked at it. Surely these things are right, you can rely on them. And I did, and I was absolutely wrong.
What he learned was that the test that everyone was using to make sense of his case, where was his cancer? How bad was it? How much had it spread or flawed? Not because of anyone's incompetence, but just because trying to get an accurate picture of cancer when you first find
it is really really hard. And that what happens is when doctors speak to their patients, they sometimes forget to communicate this fact, they pretend that they know something for certain when they actually don't, which meant that you couldn't put your trust in the results of biopsies and scans. You were of necessity in the world of subjectivity and judgment. And Dan knew all about the world of subjectivity and judgment.
It was where he had spent his entire career. Then, when he felt that he was at least informed enough to ask the right questions, he put together a list of doctors he wanted to interview, put everything on hold for two months, and had a zoom call with one specialist after another. So you you go out, how many doctors do you interview?
I had conversations with eighteen doctors, eighteen eighteen.
And of those eighteen, how many told you? Can you kind of quantify what they told you? Like, how many told you surgery were Treatnteen fifteen told you what don't do surgery? Don't do surgery?
One was split and two said yes.
Tell me about the two who said yes.
It was And I never shared the information between the two of them. I want to just objective views. And they both said almost exactly the same thing, almost exactly the same way. And they said they both acknowledged that I'm certain this will be a distinct minority of views that you're going to hear if you talk to other people, almost anybody else will tell you not to do surgery
and that you can't do surgery. But they're wrong. And a factor in it was they also both said, your chance of beating this isn't great, but it's nonexistent if you don't have surgery, and mattered a lot to me, and you know in the other calls, again good doctors, experienced doctors, but saying likely of being successful almost nothing. Not we know from the start we're not going to be able to get it all out. It's going to give you with a lot of difficult side effects. Then
you're going to have to start these other treatments. The side effects for the follow up treatments will be compounding with the side effect you're having after surgery. And I remember an oncologist thing to me, it is the absolute worst course of action you can take.
So what was different about these two guys who disagreed.
It's a funny thing because it it really does relate to my life experience and my work. Confident, clear, concise, unemotional, definitive, and convincing, not just words and manner, but factually the way they presented it, and listening to that, combined with I had already reached the point with all the information I had, realizing that there were, you know, it's cloudy information and differences of opinion, and I thought, I know that I'm comfortable with that now, and that I thought
based here. You know, I don't think I ever took a science class in high school or college, but the science convinced me there was a very good chance that these doctors were wrong, that these tests had flaws, that some of it just didn't add up in the ways that it had been looked at. And I combined my own instincts, my own reading and information, with the way these two doctors talked, and I thought, how about my life on them?
Then ended up choosing a surgeon at Duke University. He wasn't a prostate specialist. He was just someone who did complex cancer cases of all kinds. He was used to looking at things that seemed impossible. He has a different lens. Yes, he seemed broader range, presumably of problematic and.
A good That's something I can relate to I'm in rooms. You know, years ago, Malcolm, CEO of Disney, said we would never be good at handling a crisis because we've never had one. And I thought, that can't be true. It can't be true. You're Disney. And what I realized in most of the rooms I've ever been in, they've never had bet your career, bet the company crisis. We think that everybody has. You've had all kinds of tests, but for most people it's a new experience, or the stakes are so big.
Are you talking about the doctor? So in this case, the doctor had seen yes.
And I have been in hundreds of boardrooms where I'm looking to CEO and he or she's wondering, is this the end of my career? Is this how I'm going to be defined? Am I going to lose my net worth? Am I going to go to jail? Am I going to be humiliated in front of Congress? Am I going to be embarrassed? At my with my family? That fear is there, And you know, I've had them say to me, my god. My communications people are under their desks, they're
scared to death. My lawyers are arguing with each other, my board strong differences of opinions there, and then you know what you also have in those situations is they've got their friends, their neighbors, their country club colleagues, their their their business peers and friends. Somebody inevitably says to me, my wife's brother's neighbor's cousin says, I should do X. You've got it coming in from all directions. So you're
trying to figure out who do I trust. As I've communicate to you before, the facts are wrong one hundred percent guarantee you you don't have all the facts, and some of the facts you think you have it wrong. So how am I supposed to make a decision now? And so I end up with this surgeon, and he broke it into two pieces. Can I do the surgery technically? Absolutely yes? Is the surgeon going to be a success?
Different question, different questions? Will it save you? You know, that's a whole separate conversation from can I perform the procedure and succeed at that? So that you can have the chance to talk about these other things. So his first was one hundred percent yes. His second was fifty to fifty that it's going to help you at best, and if the studies are what these other doctors are saying, you do have a single digit likelihood to success. If
they're wrong, you could have fifty percent or better. So it's how do you interpret all the information we have? And then it was also saying to him, I've got to have sort of the free reign to do whatever I think I need to do once I get in.
And how quickly do you move from this is my guy to the actual surgery. What's the time.
I by the time I spoke to him. One of the things I liked about my conversation with him, I was told that you should talk to this guy, and he's confident he can help you. When I talked to him, he said, oh, no, no, no, no, I'm not confident. I'm confident I can do this procedure successfully. I can't give you false confidence about your outcome. And that was helpful to me. It was honest. I didn't need somebody. It's another view of mine. People who tell you they can
solve your problem be extremely suspicious. Extremely suspicious. Your problem is multi layers, evolved over a long period of time, all kinds of dynamics at play, and so in this case, I knew that he could do the surgery. I had already factored all the calculations from the others. I knew it was my only really good chance, and I had concluded that the analysis I was getting was flawed from
the others, and I just I said, let's go. And within three weeks I went from my first conversation with them to having surgery.
Tell me what that first conversation you had with him after the surgery was over.
The first thing was there were certain cancerous spots that were in doubt. Could he get to them? And so I needed to know immediately did you get them? And he said, yes, got.
Them because the cancer had metastasized.
Ye got them. And then it was you know how far? And he you know, he had to. He said, I had a nip cut, trim move most of the things inside you. I told him, thank you, But I'm as partial to as many parts as I can keep. So he had to do a lot, but he was confident he got everything he wanted to get. And the initial pathology after the surgery was positive. But you don't know, but it was a It was exactly what he said,
which is the surgery was successful. Now we wait on the outcomes, and and I was, I was relieved, but I it. I don't want to sound overconfident, but it was what I expected.
And how long I've forgotten now there was it was. It was a six week.
Six weeks and you get a blood test and my get a p s A score and mine had gone down significantly. Was not in a great zone, but a good zone at six weeks. And then at another six weeks I went down and I you know, I have my my text from him, which I will keep because it's the only time I've ever gotten a text from a doctor where he used miraculous three times and and one paragraph to me for the outcome of my test scores.
I believe I got a screenshot at that one.
Yeah. So and my you know, my doctors, the two they were like kids, high fiving, you know, over the phone to each other. They both joined on a conference call to call me to tell me the results. They were ecstatic.
So there's there's three trust layers here.
There is.
The miss placed trust in the beginning, understanding that you would you would offered, you would extended trust prematurely, both to doctors, and.
She had assumed that trust was justified. Trust in the doctor, trust in his experience, his approach, and trust in the tests. That was misplaced, and and I'm you know, I'm more critical of myself than I am of the doctors.
And then the second layer was understanding, I can trust myself and this this is I notice I've done this, I have experience in this.
Yes.
And then the third layer was, this is the person who I'm going to place my trust in for this surgery.
It's exactly right. I mean, I trust myself. I don't know how people. That may sound to people. It may sound arrogant or naive or whatever. It's it was hard earned from decades in rooms where people would turn to me and say, no, what do you think? And if you can't add value or what you're saying doesn't make sense, you're going to be out of that room. You're never going to be around. And my work was one hundred
percent of referral base. So if they don't have value in the room, I don't have any I don't have a career. So it was that, and then it was the person and the process. He laid out what he said he would do and how I would do it, and what the equation was I'm putting all that together along with my reading and analysis. I had a high degree of confidence that there was the right choice, and I can honestly say I didn't lose a moment's sleep,
had no second thoughts. I was certain I had chosen the right course.
The idea that you didn't lose and have a moment's sleep is is so I lost?
Why is this?
I lost more sleep over your condition you did. I was making up in the middle of the night worrying about you, and you're like sleeping like a baby.
Once I decided, I was truly confident. I can't be confident that now it's going to turn out. I was confident that I had all the information I need to make an informed decision, that I had processed it thoughtfully in a way that with the same rigor that I would give to a client, and that it was the best option available. What's going to be is what's going to be. But that's what I came to, and with that I was a patient.
In the span of six months, he went from you should get this looked at at some point. Two, you should put your affairs in order. Two, we can't find any more cancer.
I think that I discounted the idea of instincts and intuition in my work. I lived by it, but there was an eldement that discounted it, that it wasn't credentialed. I didn't bring a Harvard NBA to this. I wasn't a lawyer at a major firm. And I look back now. My instincts, intuition, judgment were everything in my work, and it wasn't that what I had replaced the other people
in the room. What I say to people is, you don't want a room full of people like me, but you want somebody like me when you're going through this, and it is this intuition and instinct and the sense that you've described, and blank of processing and making a decision, and there are thousands of things going on in your brain. You don't even no as you're making that decision. And I have lived my life but it and lived my career butt and trust. So trust is all tied up
in that. It's a fascinating field. It is what I did with clients because what they would say to me is, how don't I get people to believe us again? How do I get my customers back? How do I get them to give me more time. How can I get them to look at this in a different way? How do I do that? What do I have to do So it's all of that that plays into it. I just never figured I would end up processing it for myself.
Provision Is History is produced by Nina Bird Lawrence, Lucy Sullivan, and Ben atdaf Haffrey. Our executive producer is Jacob Smith. Engineering by Nina Bird Lawrence, original music by Luis Gira, Sound design and mastering by my Cello di'ela verra. Special thanks to Cure Posey, Morgan Ratner, and Eric Sandler. I'm Malcolm glar Ever.