Acknowledge ‘I’m not sure’ more often and assign probabilities to beliefs, as this naturally views beliefs as under construction, fostering open-mindedness and a hunger for information. This approach makes you a more believable communicator and a better decision-maker.
Actively find or create a group of like-minded individuals who commit to an ’exploratory style of thought’ to overcome individual biases. This group should agree to hold each other accountable, focusing on accuracy over being right, and be willing to disagree constructively.
Engage your ‘future self’ in present decisions, understanding that short-term discomfort from admitting mistakes or exploring bad outcomes is crucial for long-term growth and better decision-making. This means being willing to take the hit in the present to learn.
Adopt a mindset where your goal is to construct a more accurate mental model of the world, rather than confirming existing beliefs or protecting your identity. This involves approaching situations with the question, ‘Why might I be wrong?’
Work through decisions by identifying possible scenarios, assigning probabilities to them, and documenting this process. This makes it harder to ‘result’ (judge based on outcome) later and allows for examination of the process, not just the result.
Before executing a plan, imagine it has failed in the future and have everyone write down reasons why. This shifts the definition of a ’team player’ to those who creatively identify potential failures, helping anticipate and mitigate risks.
When there’s significant disagreement on probabilities or outcomes within a group, have individuals argue the opposing viewpoint. This deepens understanding, moderates views, and ensures all perspectives are thoroughly explored.
When seeking advice on a past decision, explicitly ask the advisor not to be told the outcome. Knowing the outcome distorts the analysis of the decision process, making it harder to get high-fidelity advice.
Establish a personal or group ‘swear jar’ for phrases that signal biased processing, such as ‘I should have known’ or ‘what a stupid decision.’ This helps self-monitor and identify cognitive biases, especially when winning.
In high-stakes situations, view the resources (e.g., chips in poker, money in investing) as tools for achieving a goal, rather than their inherent monetary value. This helps prevent emotional decisions driven by fear of loss or desire for quick gains.
Ensure that the stakes of your decisions are at a level where a loss does not significantly impact your overall financial or personal situation. This helps prevent risk aversion or excessive risk-seeking driven by emotional attachment to the money.
For long-term goals, like investing, resist the urge to constantly check short-term fluctuations. Frequent monitoring of outcomes can lead to emotional distress and poor decisions, even if the long-term trend is positive.
As a leader, openly express uncertainty and the ‘under construction’ nature of your beliefs to your team. This fosters respect, encourages team members to share their own uncertain opinions, and improves collective learning and decision-making.
Leaders should communicate and act in a way that assures employees it’s okay if a single innovative attempt doesn’t work out. This prevents a culture of ‘resulting’ that stifles unconventional choices and innovation.
When analyzing decisions or problems, ensure you have all necessary specific details and historical context. Lacking crucial information can lead to vague advice and ineffective solutions.
Even when alone, imagine discussing decisions and ideas with your trusted learning group or different versions of yourself (past, future, advice-giving self). This internal dialogue helps refine thoughts and hold yourself accountable.
If you want to introduce new decision-making protocols in an organization, start by finding like-minded individuals and proposing small, actionable changes (e.g., trying a red team/blue team exercise) to leadership.
Never follow a sycophant or a ‘yes-man’ who has been in their job for a long time if the boss also hasn’t changed. This suggests a lack of critical feedback and potential for stagnation.