A related thought is that an 80% chance of being right still means 2 times out of 10 you will be wrong. 80% are very good odds, but most of the time we have to make a decision about ONE time. We don't get to do it 10 times. This is support for the "made the right decision despite the outcome" attitude, but emotionally it's hard to accept it.
Thanks for taking on a prickly topic with courage and depth. One item I'd add to the "Better list" above is, Don't base your sense of worth or your approval on your decision or its outcome.
That's good advice but it can be tricky to follow. How do you take control over sense of worth when it's something that often feels beyond our control?
Good perspective, Scott. Because there is so so much that is out of/beyond our control, I think it's critical that we find a trustworthy source that accurately, honestly, and kindly reminds us that we are more than the sum of our endeavors and passions and decisions and fears. That source could be a partner, God, a friend, a therapist or someone else who helps us see the larger picture of who we truly are. And aren't.
In Thinking, Fast and Slow, Dan Kahneman suggests having a criteria list and following it like a checklist. For example, if we're hiring, it would tell us what skills and traits we're looking for and how we will know a candidate presents them. Then it's almost a mechanistic process.
While it goes against intuition (I know it goes against mine), that's the best they could devise (along with Amos Tversky) when they were researching biases. It's 100% in line with "decide how you will make a decision" first.
BTW: adopting this when hiring sometimes lands me in this uneasy place where I really liked a candidate, but they didn't show much in terms of the stuff I was looking for. Or vice versa. Fortunately, in the majority of cases, there's no dissonance.
Also, it's interesting to observe which (irrelevant for the job) traits I tend to "like" and which I rather "dislike."
(joke) Oh dear, Scott, you are losing your computer-geek-nerd credibility by giving attention to emotions...
But I'm glad you did!
Just today in the newspaper was a cartoon strip about a man and a woman talking on the roof. She complains that men don't do feelings or vulnerabilities. He then admits something, "My underwear is riding up." She says, "Shut up, Emo."
I have learned to check my bias when I make decisions. As they say, "A lawyer who represents himself in court has a fool for a client."
A related thought is that an 80% chance of being right still means 2 times out of 10 you will be wrong. 80% are very good odds, but most of the time we have to make a decision about ONE time. We don't get to do it 10 times. This is support for the "made the right decision despite the outcome" attitude, but emotionally it's hard to accept it.
thank you for exploring decision making in such depth and understanding as I get
older I often wonder
about many decisions I made and what would be different in my life
If I made a difference
choice love to discuss
this with you
Mom
To quote Nate Silver, trust the process not the outcome.
Thanks for taking on a prickly topic with courage and depth. One item I'd add to the "Better list" above is, Don't base your sense of worth or your approval on your decision or its outcome.
That's good advice but it can be tricky to follow. How do you take control over sense of worth when it's something that often feels beyond our control?
Good perspective, Scott. Because there is so so much that is out of/beyond our control, I think it's critical that we find a trustworthy source that accurately, honestly, and kindly reminds us that we are more than the sum of our endeavors and passions and decisions and fears. That source could be a partner, God, a friend, a therapist or someone else who helps us see the larger picture of who we truly are. And aren't.
In Thinking, Fast and Slow, Dan Kahneman suggests having a criteria list and following it like a checklist. For example, if we're hiring, it would tell us what skills and traits we're looking for and how we will know a candidate presents them. Then it's almost a mechanistic process.
While it goes against intuition (I know it goes against mine), that's the best they could devise (along with Amos Tversky) when they were researching biases. It's 100% in line with "decide how you will make a decision" first.
BTW: adopting this when hiring sometimes lands me in this uneasy place where I really liked a candidate, but they didn't show much in terms of the stuff I was looking for. Or vice versa. Fortunately, in the majority of cases, there's no dissonance.
Also, it's interesting to observe which (irrelevant for the job) traits I tend to "like" and which I rather "dislike."
(joke) Oh dear, Scott, you are losing your computer-geek-nerd credibility by giving attention to emotions...
But I'm glad you did!
Just today in the newspaper was a cartoon strip about a man and a woman talking on the roof. She complains that men don't do feelings or vulnerabilities. He then admits something, "My underwear is riding up." She says, "Shut up, Emo."
I have learned to check my bias when I make decisions. As they say, "A lawyer who represents himself in court has a fool for a client."