Page 27 - Complete Krav maga : the ultimate guide to over 250 self-defense and combative techniques

asking ourselves and our students “What is the real danger?” we teach ourselves

to look at the overall issue to discover the source.

Operate under stress. Creating a methodology that can handle stress means
more than just “sucking it up” or “dealing with it.” Addressing stress with
nothing more than stress management seminars is like giving bandages to a
hemophiliac—you are better off instructing them how not to cut themselves.
Krav Maga not only teaches people to function under stress, the system is
designed to be usable during stressful situations. In fact, the majority of our
techniques work better when the defender is under stress. This approach to

problem solving underscores a need in business—you must develop systems
whereby stress triggers a streamlining process: Things should move better and
faster. Your business model should be like the air foil on a race car—the faster
you drive, the more the air foil pushes down on the car, making it go even faster.

Don’t trade one danger for another. Krav Maga emphasizes simple reactions
that eliminate immediate threats without exposing the defender to additional
dangers. Krav Maga’s problem-solving process finds methods for reacting

efficiently to attacks while improving our position. The tactic translates directly
to the business world: When solving a problem, look before you leap—anticipate
where you’ll end up once you’ve made the move you’re contemplating.

We have a favorite story that illustrates the need for accurate problem solving. A
consulting team was hired to do analysis for a Fortune 500 company that wanted
to cut spending. One of the areas the consultant team focused on was an annual

report the company produced each year in compliance with a government
regulation. The company was spending roughly $400,000 per year to generate
the report in order to avoid a government fine, and they asked the consultants to
find a way to reduce the expense of creating the report. After nearly a month of
frustrating, nickel-and-dime effort, one of the consultants finally asked how
much the government fine would be. The answer: $10,000. The company was
spending $400,000 to create a report in order to avoid a fine of $10,000. The

company’s initial request for cost saving was a case of mistaken threat
assessment. It was an action that removed a danger, but did so by creating an
even more expensive one.