Yes Sayers are Rewarded by Adventure, No Sayers are Rewarded by Safety

Prints

Improv veteran Keith Johnstone shares:

There are people who prefer to say "Yes," and there are people who prefer to say "No." Those who say "Yes" are rewarded by the adventures they have, and those who say "No" are rewarded by the safety they attain. There are far more "No" sayers around than "Yes" sayers, but you can train one type to behave like the other.

I can't help but put pressure on myself to be a yes-sayer. Perhaps it's the vague belief that saying yes will lead to a fuller life and range of experiences and that saying "no" is the easy option. And somehow, the easy option in my mind can seem like the wrong option. That's why I liked Keith Johnstone's framing for yes-sayers and no-sayers, as it clearly shows the rewards for taking either route in a decision, not just one.

If you are improvising, saying yes and accepting offers takes you to situations that may not feel comfortable but give you new experiences.

Saying no keeps you where you are. Your situation is known and safe, and you feel good for that reason.

In life, we never have to be exclusively yes or exclusively no. And it doesn't have to be white-water kayaking for yes-sayers and reading books at home for no-sayers. But certainly, there are different joys in each path. I love both: the nerves and excitement of new experiences and the comfort and safety of the known and predictable. We needn't bucket ourselves into one or the other.

An adventure, even a microadventure, almost by definition, is the result of saying yes. And, like Type II fun, it can be rewarding and fulfilling. But balancing adventure with the safety and calm of staying in one's comfort zone at times feels nice to me.

Related Ideas to Yes Sayers, No Sayers

And more improv:

Accept offers
Be spontaneous
Microadventure
The bandwagon effect
Only dead fish go with the flow
"The road to success is dotted with many tempting parking spaces"—in my book Big Ideas Little Pictures

The quote is from Keith Johnstone's book Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre, Theatre Arts Books, 1979, as quoted in Improv Wisdom by Patricia Ryan Madson.

Published 5 Jan 2025

A weekly sketch by email

Learn something new in a sketch each Sunday

Get the book!
Big Ideas Little Pictures

Prefer to listen?
Try the podcast

Sketchplanations is ad-free
thanks to supporters like you.See more on Patreon

Keep exploring

The Abilene paradox

What is the Fun scale explained showing Type 1 fun as skiing, Type 2 fun as mountaineering and Type 3 fun as surviving a bear encounter (the best story)

The fun scale: understanding the types of fun

The Abiliene paradox is the paradox of how groups of people can take actions that no one in the group actually thinks is a good idea. Though individually, we each may think that an idea is a bad one, we may go along with the group decision thinking that it’s just us that disagree when, in fact, no one thinks it’s a good idea. It was coined by Jerry Harvey, a management professor, who illustrated the phenomenon with a fictional story of a family who ended up on a rubbish day out to Abilene that no one wanted to do. On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene (53 miles north) for dinner. The wife says, “Sounds like a great idea.” The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, “Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go.” The mother-in-law then says, “Of course I want to go. I haven’t been to Abilene in a long time.” The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad as the drive. They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted. One of them dishonestly says, “It was a great trip, wasn’t it?” The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, “I wasn’t delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you.” The wife says, “I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that.” The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored. The group sits back, perplexed that they decided to take a trip that none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon. More paradoxes: The coastline paradox Jevon’s paradox the liar paradox the transparency paradox the paradox of choice Also see: groupthink the bandwagon effect Harvey, J. B. (1974). “The Abilene paradox: the management of agreement”. Organizational Dynamics. 3: 63–80. Excerpt as quoted from Wikipedia :) This is not to diss Abilene. I’m sure it’s a neat place.…The Abiliene paradox is the paradox of how groups of people can take actions that no one in the group actually thinks is a good idea. Though individually, we each may think that an idea is a bad one, we may go along with the group decision thinking that it’s just us that disagree when, in fact, no one thinks it’s a good idea. It was coined by Jerry Harvey, a management professor, who illustrated the phenomenon with a fictional story of a family who ended up on a rubbish day out to Abilene that no one wanted to do. On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene (53 miles north) for dinner. The wife says, “Sounds like a great idea.” The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, “Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go.” The mother-in-law then says, “Of course I want to go. I haven’t been to Abilene in a long time.” The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad as the drive. They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted. One of them dishonestly says, “It was a great trip, wasn’t it?” The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, “I wasn’t delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you.” The wife says, “I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that.” The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored. The group sits back, perplexed that they decided to take a trip that none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon. More paradoxes: The coastline paradox Jevon’s paradox the liar paradox the transparency paradox the paradox of choice Also see: groupthink the bandwagon effect Harvey, J. B. (1974). “The Abilene paradox: the management of agreement”. Organizational Dynamics. 3: 63–80. Excerpt as quoted from Wikipedia :) This is not to diss Abilene. I’m sure it’s a neat place.

Newer

RRandom

Older