The five cognitive biases identified as associated with high productivity are:
Personal exceptionalismElaboration:
Dichotomous thinking
Correct overgeneralization
Blank canvas thinking
Schumpeterianism
Personal Exceptionalism - The confidence arising from such a cognitive bias increases resilience and stamina in the face of adversity.
Dichotomous Thinking - Dearing defines it as "being extremely judgmental of people, experiences, things; highly opinionated at the extremes; sees black and white, little grey." I would modify this to my long standing maxim. Success arises from nuanced thinking and binary decision-making. It is critical, particularly from a risk assessment perspective, to have an open and nuanced decision consideration process. Once the decision is made though, there is value in treating the decision as fixed. If you tinker with a decision, always seeking to refine it based on constantly emerging information, you risk getting stuck in the mud and not progressing. You can militate against that with the cognitive decision to view a refined and nuanced decision as binary, the only right decision. That orientation has to be a bias, i.e. a predisposition but a predisposition which can be abandoned when circumstances demand.
Correct Overgeneralization - Dearing: "Making universal judgments from limited observations and being right a lot of the time." See Gladwell in Blink and Outliers. I view this as being so expert, with corresponding reliance on implicit knowledge rather than explicit knowledge, that the success rate seems inexplicable.
Blank Canvas Thinking - Dearing: "Sees own life as a blank canvas, not a paint-by-numbers." Not sure exactly how to understand this. I am guessing that he is getting at people who are not constrained in their vision by current insoluble limits.
Schumpeterianism - Dearing: "Sees creative destruction as natural, necessary, and as their vocation." I would add, the capacity to compartmentalize the consequences of schumpeterianism so that the benefits can properly be set against the costs. My experience is that most individuals and organizations substantially overweight the benefits of the current state, even when it is problematic, because of a desire to avoid the negative consequences that will have to be incurred to achieve a better future state. When you can compartmentalize the costs as a necessary consequence, it becomes easier to look at the respective costs and benefits of the current and future state.
No comments:
Post a Comment