A wise COO of a Green Dot pointed out the “say/do” contradiction the other day.  It is something that beguiles anyone trying to understand their customer, but especially those who are serving “them.”

Let me clarify: we all say we want to lose weight, pay off our debt, run a marathon, save for college, buy only organic, floss.  What we actually do is another matter altogether.  We do open a bag of chips, instead of going to the gym.  We do pay the minimum due on our credit card statement.  We do hit the snooze button rather than run 5 miles in the cold.  And it’s not just the lazy and bad things we do do.  We do prefer “tailored shirts” this season, we do buy the tablet instead of the laptop, we do prefer mint over cinnamon.  This is the “say/do” contradiction.

Visionaries, like Steve Jobs, aren’t listening to what people say they’ll do.  Instead they guess, anticipate, and take gambles on what people will actually do.  We all said we liked the keyboard, so why introduce a mouse? Or a touchscreen?

The “say/do” contradiction is especially vexing when it comes to understanding a customer who is poor, and even more for those who care about their welfare the most.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve regurgitated stats about what the underbanked have stated, in statistically relevant surveys, that they would save if given the chance.  They’ve said they will pay off their debt.  They say they don’t use payday lenders; that they would use a bank account if this or if that.  We cling to these stats and anecdotes because they give us hope.  If only we build the better mousetrap or provide access to a better bank the world would be a better place.  Like all people, some underbanked will do what they say.  So better mousetraps are meaningful and inclusive banks will improve some lives in real ways.

But when you add “us/them” to “say/do” the disparity gap widens geometrically.  Most do gooders, like me, are not “them.”  We barely know “them.”  We really do care, but with startling frequency we really don’t know.  I’m shocked how few people in the “community development” or “financial inclusion” world have ever walked into a check casher.  Or how many consumer advocates, who earn their modest living expressing legitimate grievances to the Western Unions and Cash Americas of the world, have literally no clue who exactly uses those services or why.  Wanting better for “them” gives us a moral high-ground. And all too often removes us more from why “they” do prefer cash; or do choose the payday lender; or do avoid banks.  This makes it harder for us to help “them.”  And we see this surface in the numerous unintended consequences of consumer protections put into place.  The moral high ground certainly trumps boring old reality, especially with a long suit in data and statistics. Us/them + say/do = poor/results.

So what we need is to realize “they” are “us.”  To learn how they are like us: actively, slowly, and humbly.  I think this is called empathy.  Then we need visionaries who can bridge a vision for a better world with the guts to guess, anticipate, and take gambles on what people will actually do.  These visionaries will be hidden in sheep’s, wolves’ and plain clothing.  We at Core seek and fund these visionaries.

If you’re a do gooder, please keep doing what you’re doing, and push the incumbents to do better – we need to do way better – but get to know your customer, for crying out loud.  If you’re an operator, simply addressing demand can be a cynical and zero-sum game.  Creating long term value – and upward mobility – is not just a challenge worthy of your talent, but a means to greater enterprise value.