Why We Run Before We Ask
- Or Bar Cohen
- Jan 4
- 3 min read
In professional life, people rarely run from real danger. They run from uncertainty.
A vague comment from a manager.A confusing interview question.A role that sounds promising but is undefined.
Before we ask, clarify, or test reality, many of us withdraw, overreact, or quietly disengage. This pattern isn’t irrational. It’s human—and it’s deeply wired into how the brain handles perceived threat.
This article explores why this occurs, how it manifests in the workplace and in careers, and how to interrupt the cycle before it costs opportunities.

The Brain Treats Uncertainty as Risk
Human decision-making evolved to prioritize survival rather than precision. When signals are ambiguous, the brain tends to prioritize speed over accuracy (Kahneman, 2011). Ambiguity activates the same systems designed to protect us from danger—even when the “threat” is social or professional rather than physical.
Two well-established mechanisms are at play:
First, false alarms are cheaper than missed threats. From an evolutionary perspective, reacting to something harmless is safer than ignoring something dangerous (LeDoux, 1996). At work, this means unclear cues, silence, tone changes, and vague feedback can trigger disproportionate reactions.
Second, negative signals dominate perception. Research consistently shows that negative information weighs more heavily than positive information in our interpretation of events (Baumeister et al., 2001). One ambiguous comment can overshadow weeks of positive feedback, shaping the entire narrative we tell ourselves.
The result is predictable: when outcomes feel uncertain, and control feels low, people don’t slow down to gather information. They act to reduce discomfort. Often, that action looks like avoidance.
What “Running” Looks Like in Careers and Organizations
Avoidance at work is rarely apparent. It often looks reasonable.
People stop asking questions and start guessing. They interpret feedback as judgment rather than input. They delay applications, conversations, or decisions “until things are clearer.”
In reality, clarity rarely appears on its own.
In organizational settings, this pattern is often mislabeled as resistance or lack of motivation. In career contexts, it’s mistaken for indecision. But research on sensemaking shows that when information is incomplete, people construct meaning from fragments—and then act on those stories as if they were facts (Weick, 1995).
This explains why:
Candidates withdraw after interviews that felt “off” without checking assumptions
Employees disengage instead of seeking alignment
High performers overcorrect after minor feedback
The behavior isn’t about logic. It concerns a nervous system attempting to restore safety, followed by a story that justifies the move (Kahneman, 2011).
Practical Application - Interrupting the Avoidance Loop
You don’t need to eliminate fear to make better decisions. You need to slow the sequence.
A simple framework:
Notice → Clarify → Act deliberately
First, notice the urge to avoid. When you feel the impulse to disengage, delay, or escape, assume uncertainty, not danger, is driving the reaction.
Second, separate facts from interpretation. Ask yourself what you actually know versus what you’re assuming. This alone reduces emotional intensity and restores perspective (Lazarus, 1991).
Third, replace avoidance with one low-risk clarifying action:
Ask what success looks like
Request an example
Check priorities or expectations
Small questions reduce ambiguity, increase perceived control, and lower threat, thereby making thoughtful action possible (Edmondson, 1999).
The goal isn’t confrontation. Its accuracy.
How I Work With This Pattern in Career & LinkedIn Mentoring
Much of my work with professionals focuses on this exact moment when uncertainty silently pushes people into avoidance. Through 1:1 career and LinkedIn mentoring, I help clients identify these patterns, rebuild the story using evidence, and translate clarity into visible, confident action. Whether it’s interviews, leadership roles, or career transitions, the work is about one thing: making decisions from understanding, not fear.
References
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain. Simon & Schuster.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.



Comments