You’re Not Overwhelmed—You’re Misdiagnosing the Real Problem Holding You Back

Resolving the three enemies of action: Uncertainty, paradox, and ambiguity

We live in the age of overwhelm—we're overwhelmed by too many challenges, too much content, and the feeling that we'll be worse off than our parents (and our children worse off than us).

Sometimes the overwhelm is acute—when things like grief, illness, sudden loss overtake us. Those experiences need to be met on their own terms. But as an advisor, I often see overwhelm showing up with clients who aren't facing one devastating thing, but a fog of everything.

Our problem is not being overwhelmed—it’s a symptom, but not the root cause. And I've had some success helping clients unwind their sense of being overwhelmed by realizing it’s what we get when we mash together three different problems into one emotional casserole: Uncertainty, paradox, and ambiguity.

These three problems trigger different psychological responses. If you don’t separate and diagnose them, you can fall into a loop of the same default coping strategies, a loop that quietly smothers action by disguising delay as preparation.

Then, when nothing gets done, we feel hopeless and overwhelmed.

So let’s unpack these three problems and find a framework that enables us to move forward even when we’re not sure what we’ll encounter.

1. Uncertainty: “I don’t know how this will turn out.”

Uncertainty is about outcomes, not about the plan. You can see the path, understand the rules, and even know the steps to take. But you don’t know if it will work.

This causes stress because our brains hate uncertainty. We want guarantees before we make the effort, work hard, and take a risk (which, if we know whether a risk would pay off, wouldn’t make it very risky). When we run into an unknown, our brains treat it as a danger. Uncertainty gets mislabeled as a problem when it is actually a condition of reality.

This manifests itself in a number of critical areas: the markets, our health, the health of our loved ones, relationships, and anything that takes time and complex systems to unfold.

And because we can’t get past uncertainty, we don’t advance to making decisions. Uncertainty stalling sounds like:

• I need more information.

• I am looking for reassurance.

• I’ll act when I have more confidence.

• I have to revert to control rituals (planning, tweaking, optimizing, reviewing assumptions).

How to overcome uncertainty

In an earlier post, I talked about my client Bruce and how uncertainty was the Achilles heel of all his careful planning.

Here’s the short form of how to train tolerance of uncertainty:

• Define small reversible actions and move quickly to act on them.

• Treat the small actions as information gathering to refine assumptions, not to make permanent commitments.

• Constantly ask, “What can I test, not solve?”

Remember, progress comes from exposure to uncertainty in small, survivable doses. Confidence is a side effect, not an end goal.

2. Paradox: “How can I act when two opposing things are simultaneously true?”

Paradox triggers decision-making failures through cognitive dissonance and psychological discomfort. For example:

• You need discipline and flexibility in your planning.

• You must think long-term and act short-term to improve your chances of success.

• You need to consider the problem to improve accuracy and make an effort right now to create momentum.

In short: We want either/or, but reality operates on both/and.

Paradox failures are tricky because they can seem like “optimization” and lead to:

• Flip-flopping strategies constantly

• Overcorrecting after every new data point

• Abandoning reliable long-term systems the moment short-term friction appears

Notice how these may feel like you’re doing something when in reality you’re running in place.

How to overcome paradox

You can’t “solve” paradox by picking a side. You cannot collapse complexity because you’re uncomfortable. Instead, stop making panicked choices and start operating inside of the paradox without lurching to one side or another by:

• Naming both truths explicitly

• Designing systems and communications that accommodate the tension between the two sides

• Deciding in advance which side you will emphasize for now and pre-determine the circumstances to adjust your approach

Here’s an example of paradox: My GenX business owner client would push into aggressive growth mode, then abruptly retreat out of guilt when meeting with me for financial planning along with his spouse. He anchored around achievement and upward mobility, while she preached sacrifice for family and security above all. They were both right, even though they were both taking diametrically opposed positions.

The solution? I teamed up with his attorney and successfully helped him design around the tension instead of solving for it. We designed twelve-week strategic sprints followed by scheduled recovery windows. He stopped chasing purity on one side of his paradox and instead started managing a rhythm between the two sides.

3. Ambiguity: “How can I act when I have no line of sight?”

Ambiguity is about inputs. You don’t know:

• What the current state of affairs really looks like

• What the current rules of decision-making are

• What is most important

• What success looks like

• What the next best step might be

Again, our brains hate this uncertainty, so most people wait until clarity presents itself. That clarity may arrive, but the vast majority of the time, it arrives as hindsight after it is useful.

Failure to overcome ambiguity, in my experience, often looks like overwhelmed disengagement that quietly strips choices as time goes by. Because there is so much unknown, how can we decide what to do?

I see ambiguity threaten to defeat families regularly with a cognitive impairment diagnosis. For example, consider impairment with “Dad” when:

• We don’t know how long Dad is going to live

• We don’t know how much care Dad is going to need

• There isn’t consensus among family members that Dad really needs help

• Dad doesn’t acknowledge that he needs assistance despite significant evidence to the contrary

• Mom doesn’t want to upset Dad and take any protective action for him, or for herself

• We don’t know what the parents’ financial situation really is

• We aren’t sure what formal and informal roles we might play as successor decision-makers

How to overcome ambiguity

When I start with new clients, I always conduct a thorough articulation of the current reality. If we continue with our cognitive impairment example, this means:

• Relying on qualified third parties to help understand, qualify, and quantify current circumstances (doctors, attorneys, care managers, etc.)

• Fostering consensus among those who influence decisions on the state of affairs.

• Deciding on the least amount of new information we need to support decisions about the most important priority. For example: If Dad wants to stay at home, exactly what will it take to make that happen and keep Mom and Dad safe and thriving with his impairment? It’s helpful to lean on third parties to help you define/determine those answers.
  Also, it is very important not to skip this step and jump to, “What if they run out of money or she dies first or some other worst case?” Remember, we are overcoming ambiguity and training ourselves to methodically get more information to start seeing paths. Always start with the most hopeful outcome, regardless of how realistic it is. Otherwise people shut down and stay in the Ambiguous Ocean.

Ambiguity is resolved by a thorough sitrep and then a priority-sorted information hunt. Ambiguity is defeated by fact-finding and third-party assistance as an ongoing process, not a one-shot single action.

A note on acceptance

I regularly remind families that acceptance is not defeat, surrender, or resignation. It means looking at things the way they stand and being able to say, “That’s the way they are.” You don’t have to like it, you just have to see it as it is.

The AATM advice: Don’t let the unknown overwhelm you

When people procrastinate on key decisions like financial planning or long-term care, they don’t do it out of laziness. They do it because they are overwhelmed by what they can’t control or predict. This leads to delaying decisions by trying to eliminate uncertainty before acting, trying to collapse a paradox into a single answer, or trying to gain clarity in the face of ambiguity.

Here are three things that actually work:

1. Accept uncertainty as the price of outcomes
   Outcomes are often unknown, but you can shrink your bet by anticipating uncertainty and moving toward a solution that is more likely (but not guaranteed) to work.

2. Respect paradox instead of collapsing it
   When two truths are competing, don’t solve for one side of the equation. Design an approach that finds a rhythm inside the tension because both sides may be “correct.”

3. Attack ambiguity with action, not rumination
   When your inputs are unclear, figure out where you are first and then how to serve your top priority. Lean on family members, friends, and experienced third parties to add clarity and build momentum toward decisions you need to make, even if you don’t have all the information you want.

By breaking down these three common problems, you’ll feel less overwhelmed and more certain that you’re heading in the right direction… even if the road ahead is still a little foggy or if your GPS is giving you two options to reach your destination.

Related: Why Your Head Should Be in the Clouds