Category Archives: Psychology

Your Response is What Matters

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

When was the last time you taught someone a new method or technique? What was their reaction? How did it make you feel? Will you do it again?

When was the last time you learned something new from a colleague? What was your reaction? What did you do so it would happen again?

When was the last time you woke up early because you were excited to go to work? How did you feel about that? What can change so it happens once a week?

When was the last time you had a crazy idea and your colleagues helped you make it real? How did you feel about that? How can you do it for them? What can you do to make it happen more frequently?

When was the last time you had a crazy idea and it was squelched because it violated a successful recipe? How did you feel about that? What can you do so it happens differently next time?

When was the last time you used your good judgement without asking for permission? How did you feel about that? What can you do to give others the confidence to use their best judgement?

When was the last time someone gave you credit for doing good work? And when was the last time you did the same for someone else? What can you do so the behavior blossoms into common practice?

When was the last time you openly contradicted a majority opinion with a dissenting minority opinion? Though it was received poorly, you must do it again. The majority needs to hear your dissenting opinion so they can sharpen their thinking.

When was the last time you gave good advice to a younger colleague? How can you systematize that type of behavior?

When was the last time you did work so undeniably good that others twisted it a bit and adopted it as their own? Don’t feel badly. When doing innovative work this is what success looks like. All that really matters is your customers realize the value from the work and not who gets credit. What can you do so this type of thing happens as a matter of course?

Good things happen and bad things happen. That’s how life goes. But the important part is you pay attention to what worked and what didn’t. And the second important part is actively making the good stuff happen more frequently and the bad stuff happen less frequently.

Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Addressing the Veteran Mental Health Crisis

Leave a reply

A New Frontier in Healing for Memorial Day Weekend

Addressing the Veteran Mental Health Crisis

by Braden Kelley and Art Inteligencia

As a nation, we have an enduring obligation to the brave individuals who have served in our military. On this Memorial Day weekend, while we honor their sacrifice, we must also look toward a future where we care for the psychological wounds of war. One of the greatest challenges we face is the veteran mental health crisis, with high rates of PTSD, depression, and suicide. Emerging research suggests that psychedelic treatments could significantly alleviate these conditions, providing a new pathway to healing that we cannot afford to ignore.

Understanding the Crisis

The statistics are alarming. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), approximately 17 veterans die by suicide every day. Furthermore, the VA estimates that around 15% of Vietnam veterans, 12% of Gulf War veterans, and 11-20% of veterans who served in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom suffer from PTSD in a given year. Traditional treatments like psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy have proven beneficial for some, but many veterans experience symptoms that persist despite these interventions.

The Promise of Psychedelics

In recent years, researchers have turned their attention to the therapeutic potential of psychedelic substances such as MDMA, psilocybin, and LSD. These substances are showing promise in treating PTSD, depression, and other mental health issues. A landmark study conducted by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) in collaboration with the VA found that 67% of participants treated with MDMA-assisted therapy no longer met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD after three sessions. This is a groundbreaking finding that cannot be ignored.

Similarly, psilocybin, the active compound in “magic mushrooms,” has shown potential in alleviating depression and anxiety symptoms in numerous studies. A study from Johns Hopkins Medicine demonstrated that psilocybin-assisted therapy resulted in rapid and sustained reductions in depression severity, with effects lasting for weeks and even months. The therapeutic mechanisms of psychedelics, which include altering neural network connectivity and promoting emotional processing, offer a new realm of possibilities for treatment.

Legal and Regulatory Challenges

Despite promising results, the legal status of these substances remains a significant barrier. Classified as Schedule I substances under the Controlled Substances Act, they are currently deemed to have “no accepted medical use.” However, as the evidence base strengthens, there is growing momentum for reevaluating this classification. States like Oregon and cities such as Denver have decriminalized psilocybin, paving the way for broader acceptance and access.

Building a Comprehensive Support System

To address the veteran mental health crisis effectively, we must take a multi-faceted approach:

Policy Revision and Advocacy: It is crucial for policymakers to prioritize the revision of regulations surrounding psychedelics. We need comprehensive legislative efforts to reclassify these substances, allowing for more extensive research and greater accessibility.
Research and Training: Increased funding for research into psychedelic-assisted therapies is essential. Universities, independent research organizations, and the VA should collaborate to expand clinical trials. Alongside research, training programs for mental health professionals must be developed to ensure they are well-equipped to provide these treatments safely and effectively.
Education and Awareness: Public awareness campaigns can help destigmatize mental health and psychedelic treatments. Stories of healing and recovery should be shared, and educational resources must be made available to veterans, their families, and the general public.
Holistic Care Models: Veteran care must incorporate holistic and integrative approaches, including mindfulness, nutrition, and community support, alongside psychedelic treatments. These support systems are vital for sustaining mental health and can multiply the therapeutic effects of psychedelics.
Veteran-Centric Programs: Programs tailored specifically to veterans’ unique experiences and needs should be developed. Peer support systems, where veterans can share their experiences and support one another through healing, can enhance recovery outcomes.

The Role of Community

Community plays a pivotal role in healing. As a nation, we must foster environments that not only support veterans but actively engage them in the healing process. Community centers focused on veteran well-being, alongside integration programs that help veterans transition back into civilian life with purpose and support, can be transformative.

The Moral Imperative

As we commemorate Memorial Day, we must also reflect on our moral duty to those who have served. The veteran mental health crisis is a call to action—an opportunity not only to acknowledge the sacrifices of our military personnel but to invest in their healing and well-being. Psychedelic treatments represent a beacon of hope, backed by rigorous science and positive outcomes. It is essential for us to come together as a society, to push for changes that reflect our commitment to caring for veterans in the most effective and compassionate ways possible.

Conclusion

The journey to mental health recovery for veterans is not an easy one, but it is a journey we must undertake collectively. By embracing innovation and fostering an environment of openness and support, we can lead the way in addressing the mental health crisis that afflicts our veterans. The time to act is now. With courage, compassion, and collaboration, we can chart a course toward healing and honor the legacy of those who have served with dignity and responsibility.

In the spirit of unity and progress, let us stand together to advocate for effective solutions and a brighter future for all veterans. Their healing is our mission. Let us not falter in this duty.

Accelerate your change and transformation success

Image Credit: Microsoft CoPilot

Content Authenticity Statement: Most of the paragraphs in the article were created with the help of OpenAI Playground.

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

The Real Reason Your Team Isn’t Speaking to You

1 Reply

The Real Reason Your Team Isn't Speaking to You

GUEST POST from David Burkus

It’s a common issue in many organizations – teams not voicing obstacles or issues in their work. If you’ve been a leader for a while, you’ve probably experienced it firsthand. Maybe you and your team had a check-in meeting with everyone, and everything was positive. Everyone gives a status update. And no one is asking for help. So, the meeting ended, and everyone went about their business.

But you were suspicious. Your team was saying it was all good. But then they started missing deadlines, or the project came in over budget, or it didn’t come in at all.

You’re not alone. In fact, in many organizations’ failures happen and get covered up at many levels of the organization. It’s not uncommon for senior leaders to be the least informed about what’s really happening in the organization because everyone at every level is trying to minimize failure…or trying to minimize their role in it.

No one trusts each other enough to share their setbacks, so no one knows what’s holding the team back.

But trust doesn’t automatically resolve teamwide issues. Building trust is great, but research suggests that trust alone is insufficient. Instead, teams need to feel psychological safety—a climate of mutual trust and respect that helps team members feel safe to take interpersonal risks. Risks like voicing failures or disagreements, but also risks like sharing their “crazy” ideas that just might be brilliant.

Teams with psychological safety have members who can be vulnerable and authentic with each other. They ask questions or offer ideas that may seem odd but can lead the team’s thinking in new directions. Psychological safety encourages team members to speak up when they disagree, and as a result more diverse viewpoints are shared. Psychological safety reduces failures, because when people feel that they can speak freely they’re more likely to intervene before a team makes a mistake. In fact, research from Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson, who first discovered the power of psychology safety on teams, suggests that on diverse teams, psychological safety determines whether their varied strengths are harnessed or if they perform below their potential.

In her work, Edmondson describes psychological safety as “a team climate characterized by interpersonal trust and mutual respect in which people are comfortable being themselves.”

Trust and Respect.

These may seem similar. But they have their differences. The interplay between them is what builds psychological safety. Trust is how much we feel we can share our authentic selves with others. Respect is how much we feel they accept that self. If I trust you, then I will share honestly with you. If you respect me, then you will value what I’ve shared. High-performing teams don’t need to just trust each other, they also need to learn how to respect each other’s contribution.

So how can leaders build a sense of trust and respect on a team? Here’s a few ideas:

1. Celebrate Failures

Celebrating failures on a team doesn’t mean teams throw a party every time they lose, but it doesn’t mean that every loss immediately triggers a round of “shift the blame” or that they forbid each other from talking about “the project which shall not be named.” Failures are inevitable, and often for reasons outside of a team’s control. Clients change their mind. Budgets get cut. Global pandemics disrupt the supply chain and force everyone to look at each other on video calls. To build trust on a team, the team must be comfortable with the idea that they will fail—and that they will learn from failure.

So, taking the time to celebrate what the painful experience taught the team can be a worthwhile exercise. This happens in several ways. You could draft a “failure resume” for yourself and encourage teammates to do the same, listing every job or project that didn’t turn out as hoped. As a team, you could create a “failure wall” with pictures or quotes from projects that blew up or clients you didn’t win. Sara Blakely, founder of Spanx, throws regular Oops Meetings, where she admits her own mistakes and encourages the team to do the same. One pharmaceutical company went so far as to create “Failure Wakes” to gather researchers together around a promised but failed compound. The team said their good-byes, and expressed gratitude for the lessons working on that aborted drug taught them. These types of celebrations not only focus the team on lessons learned, but they encourage future risk-taking and keep teams motivated even when those chances of failure are high.

2. Hold After-Action Reviews

One way to at least celebrate learning if not failure is the after-action review. Although unlike clapping or waving, this is a more serious ritual done after the action (hence the name). Originally a military ritual, after-action reviews work well because they force the team to discuss strengths and weaknesses and to dissect past failures (and even successes) for lessons. Just after the team finishes a project, or during an important milestone, gather them together and ask them a few questions:

What was our intended result?
What was the actual result?
Why were they different?
What will we do the same next time?
What will we do differently next time?

The purpose of the meeting is not to find someone to blame, or someone to give all the credit. The goal is to extract lessons from the project about where the team is strong and where they need improvement. When people are open and honest about their weaknesses and contributions to failure, celebrate the vulnerability they just signaled.

3. Model Active Listening

The easiest way to signal disrespect to someone is make them feel ignored. The reverse is true as well. Making people feel listened to and truly heard is one of the simplest ways to signal that you respect what they have to say. Great team cultures are marked by how well they listen to each other and take turns speaking so everyone feels heard. But our natural tendency as humans can make it difficult to show others we’re listening. We want to help people. So, when people come to us with problems, we want to jump in and help right away. For team leaders, this tendency is even stronger. People are supposed to come to us for help, right? So, we start helping…which means we start talking…which means we stop listening.

One simple trick for ensuring you listen longer and help others feel more heard is to get used to saying, “Tell me more.” When someone says something that triggers a thought in your head, and you feel your mouth starting to open so your brilliant advice can greet the world—stop. Instead of whatever you were going to say, just say “Tell me more.” If you want to take active listening even further, consider a useful acronym from communication expert Julian Treasure: RASA. When someone else is speaking, Receive their ideas by paying attention to them as they speak. Appreciate what they are saying by nodding or giving confirming feedback. Summarize what the other person said when they’re finished. Then Ask them questions to explore their idea further. Since respect is a learned behavior, as you model active listening your team will follow your example—and more members of your team will feel heard and respected.

4. Recognize, And Share Credit

Leadership thinker Warren Bennis once noted that good leaders shine under the spotlight, but great leaders help others shine. Teams that share credit and take the time to recognize each other are teams where members feel more respected and more trusted. But teams that fight for credit when a project is finished (or fight over blame when it fails) diminish what little respect they had before. Great team leaders look for as many ways to share credit with their team as they can, even if they desire most of the credit. This can be as simple as taking the time to appreciate each team member’s strengths, or as big as shouting those praises throughout the company. When team members know what you appreciate about them, they know you respect their abilities and their ideas.

In addition, find small wins that can be celebrated more often—hence creating more opportunities to recognize others. Small wins have a big impact on individual and team motivation—and that impact only gets bigger when credit for the win is shared team wide.

Conclusion – The Psychological Safety Cycle

When individuals feel respected, and respectful behavior becomes the norm on a team, trust will naturally increase as well. That ensures that great ideas, and great lessons, get heard and considered. Without respect, that trust you’re building by accepting failures and embracing held-back brilliance from your team, will have a very short half-life. You can’t sleep on respect.

It’s a cycle.

You build trust on the team, which encourages people to take risks (or to risk admitting failures) and if that risk is met with respect…trust grows even more. If it doesn’t, you’re failing even faster.

It’s worth including in the conclusion, that we’re not talking about repeat failures. Psychological safety doesn’t mean there’s no accountability for consistently under-performing. It doesn’t mean that people can get away slacking off or that teams will just keep failing. But it does mean they don’t have to be afraid to ask for help or admit those occasional times when they do fail. It means that they take learning and growth so seriously that don’t hold back talking about their own struggles and their own mistakes.

And that’s why high-performing teams are psychologically safe teams.

Image credit: Pixabay

Originally published on DavidBurkus.com on January 6, 2024

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Paying Your Employees More Can Save You Money

Leave a reply

Paying Your Employees More Can Save You Money

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

What’s the secret to keeping employees, getting them to work hard and provide a more engaging experience with your customers? There are two answers. The first is one word: Money.

Many years ago, I worked with a well-known fast casual restaurant chain. I was impressed by its low turnover and high customer engagement and satisfaction ratings. Its secret was higher starting pay, generous raises and a reasonable benefits package. All of that compensation led to attracting the best candidates, and more importantly, keeping them.

A recent RetailWire article covered the higher wages Costco pays its employees. Typical hourly employees (Costco refers to them as “assistants”) include cashiers, stockers, warehouse personnel and people running the Costco food courts. With a tighter labor market, it is tougher to find people to fill these roles (and others). It is reported that Costco’s wages are at the high end of the industry. A memo from Costco’s CEO Ron Vachris stated, “We believe our hourly wages and benefits will continue to far outpace others in the retail industry.”

While wages are higher, employee retention in retail has gone down. According to an article in The Economist, the average employee turnover rate in the retail industry is 60%. Costco’s turnover is 8%, which is an incredible 86.67% lower than the industry.

Does this mean the higher wages are being paid by consumers? The simple answer is no. The longer answer is why. Just because a company pays employees more, a resulting benefit, such as lower turnover, actually reduces the cost of the higher wage. Lower turnover results in lower hiring costs, which also includes the cost of on-boarding and training. The full cost of the higher wage is dramatically reduced to a point that might pay for itself.

But higher wages aren’t the only reason employees stick around, work harder and better engage with customers. As mentioned at the top of the article, there is also a second reason, and that is culture.

While some employees will stick around for the paycheck, if you want the most out of any employee, they must like their job, and that goes beyond the job description. It also includes who they work with and work for. The culture of a company helps retain the best talent.

Regardless of what you pay your employees, if they don’t like the company, the way they are treated, their boss or leadership, paying them more may not be enough. I won’t go into creating company culture, but you can check out a Forbes article from last year that covered the Employee Hierarchy of Needs with a focus on building a fulfilling workplace culture.

Happy employees mean happier customers. All the benefits mentioned translate to higher NPS and customer satisfaction scores. If you compare the highest-rated companies and brands for customer service and experience posted by the American Customer Satisfaction Institute (ACSI) and the highest-rated companies and brands by employees at www.Glassdoor.com, you’ll find many of the same names. This is further backed up by an excellent article in the Harvard Business Review titled “The Key to Happy Customers? Happy Employees” by Andrew Chamberlain and Daniel Zhao. Even though it was written just over five years ago, the insights are more relevant than ever.

Companies like Costco prove that investing in employees through both compensation and culture isn’t just good for employees. It’s good for business. Employee happiness is contagious. Customers pick up on it. And when customers are happy, they come back, spend more and tell others. And, that makes the leadership and investors happy too!

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

This article was originally published on Forbes.com

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Don’t Get Fooled by Hucksters, Gurus and Consultants

Leave a reply

Don't Get Fooled by Hucksters, Gurus And Consultants

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

When I lived in Poland, it was common to say that “life is cruel, and full of traps.” From an American perspective, the aphorism can be a bit of a culture shock. We’re raised to believe in the power of positivity, the American dream and the can-do spirit. Negativity can be seen as something worse than a weakness, both an indulgence and a privation at the same time.

Over the years, however, I came to respect the Poles’ innate suspicion. The truth is that we are far too easily fooled and taken in by those prey on the glitches in our cognitive machinery. Sometimes the ones peddling bunk have fooled also themselves. Their claims seem to be supported by logic and evidence, but their promises never quite pan out.

We’re taken in because we want their claims to be true. We’d like to think that there is a secret we’re missing, that there’s a black magic that we’re not privy to and, if we prove our worth and obtain access to a few simple truths, we’ll capture the success that eludes us. Yet these frauds follow common patterns and there are telltale signs we can learn to spot.

1. The Survivorship Bias Trick

In 2005 W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne, both distinguished professors at INSEAD, published Blue Ocean Strategy. In their study of 108 companies the authors found that “blue ocean” launches, those in new categories without competition, far outperformed the shark-infested “red ocean” line extensions that are the norm in the corporate world. It was an immediate hit, selling over 3.5 million copies.

Bain consultants Chris Zook and James Allen’ book, Profit from the Core, boasted even more extensive research encompassing 200 case studies, a database of 1,854 companies, 100 interviews of senior executives and an “extensive review” of existing literature. They found that firms that focused on their ”core” far outperformed those who strayed.

It doesn’t take too much thinking to start seeing problems. How can you both “focus on your core” and seek out “blue oceans”? It betrays logic that both strategies could outperform one another. Also, how do you define “core?” Core markets? Core capabilities? Core customers? While it’s true that “blue ocean” markets lack competitors, they don’t have any customers either. Who do you sell to?

Yet there is an even bigger, more insidious problem and it is a trick that hucksters, gurus and consultants regularly employ to falsely establish dubious claims. It’s called survivorship bias. Notice how “research” doesn’t include firms that went out of business because there were no customers in those “blue oceans” or because they failed to diversify outside of their “core.” The data only pertains to the ones that survived.

Can you imagine a medical researcher failing to include the results of patients that died? Or an airplane designer forgetting to mention the prototypes that crashed? Yet hucksters, gurus and consultants get away with it all the time.

2. Dressing Up Social Proof As “Research”

Another trick hucksters, gurus and consultants use is to dress up social proof as research in order to increase their credibility as experts and establish a need for their services. They say, for example, that they find company profitability is strongly correlated with a customer focus or that culture has a statistically powerful effect on performance.

At first glance, these claims seem reasonable, but as Phil Rosenzweig explained in The Halo Effect, it’s all part of a subtle bait and switch. What is being “researched” is not really “customer focus” or “culture,” but perceptions about those things in responses to a survey. So it is highly likely that successful companies are merely being perceived as having these traits.

For example, in 2000, before the dotcom crash, Cisco was flying high. A profile in Fortune reported it to have an unparalleled culture with highly motivated employees. But just one year later, when the market tanked, the very same publication described it as “cocksure” and “naive.” Did the “culture” really change that much in a year, with the same leadership?

Some might say that it’s “obvious” that a strong culture and customer focus contribute to performance, but then why go through the whole kabuki dance of “research?” Why not just say, “if you believe these things are important, we can help you with them?” It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that their is either an intent to deceive or just pure incompetence.

You don’t have to look far to see that this is an ongoing con. A few quick Google searches led me to major consulting firms currently selling halo effects as causal relationships to trusting customers here and here.

3. The VUCA World

Today it’s become an article of faith that we live in a VUCA world (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous). Business pundits tell us that we must “innovate or die.” These are taken as basic truths that are beyond questioning or reproach. Those who doubt the need for change risk being dismissed as out of touch.

The data, however, tell a very different story. A report from the OECD found that markets, especially in the United States, have become more concentrated and less competitive, with less churn among industry leaders. The number of young firms have decreased markedly as well, falling from roughly half of the total number of companies in 1982 to one third in 2013.

A comprehensive 2019 study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found two correlated, but countervailing trends: the rise of “superstar” firms and the fall of labor’s share of GDP. Essentially, the typical industry has fewer, but larger players. Their increased bargaining power leads to more profits, but lower wages.

The truth is that we don’t really disrupt industries anymore. We disrupt people. Economic data shows that for most Americans, real wages have hardly budged since 1964. Income and wealth inequality remain at historic highs. Anxiety and depression, already at epidemic levels, worsened during the Covid-19 pandemic.

So why do hucksters, gurus and consultants insist that industries are under constant threat of disruption?

4. The Allure Of Pseudoscience

In Richard Feynman’s 1974 commencement speech at Cal-Tech, he recounted going to a new-age resort where people were learning reflexology. A man was sitting in a hot tub rubbing a woman’s big toe and asking the instructor, “Is this the pituitary?” Unable to contain himself, the great physicist blurted out, “You’re a hell of a long way from the pituitary, man!”

His point was that it’s relatively easy to make something appear “scientific” by, for example, having people wear white coats or present charts and tables, but that doesn’t really make it science. True science is testable and falsifiable. We can’t merely state what you believe to be true, but must give others a means to test it and prove us wrong.

This is important because it’s very easy for things to look like the truth, but actually be false. That’s why we need to be careful, especially when it’s something we already believe in. The burden is even greater when it’s an idea that we want to be true. That’s when we need to redouble our efforts, dig in and make sure we verify our facts.

Hucksters, gurus and consultants love to prey on our weakness for authority by saying that “the science says…” The truth is that science doesn’t “say”anything, it merely produces hypotheses that haven’t been disproven yet. Some, like Darwin’s theory of natural selection, have been around a long time, so we’re pretty sure that they’re true, but even in that case a large part of it was debunked within months. The ‘theory” as we know it now is what survived.

There are no absolute answers. There is, as Sam Arbesman has put it, a half life of facts. We can only make decisions on higher or lower levels of confidence. In the real world, there are no “sure things,” and don’t let hucksters, gurus and consultants tell you any different.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credits: Pexels

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Change Behavior to Change Culture

1 Reply

Change Behavior to Change Culture

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

There’s always lots of talk about culture and how to change it. There is culture dial to turn or culture level to pull. Culture isn’t a thing in itself, it’s a sentiment that’s generated by behavioral themes. Culture is what we use to describe our worn paths of behavior. If you want to change culture, change behavior.

At the highest level, you can make the biggest cultural change when you change how you spend your resources. Want to change culture? Say yes to projects that are different than last year’s and say no to the ones that rehash old themes. And to provide guidance on how to choose those new projects create, formalize new ways you want to deliver new value to new customers. When you change the criteria people use to choose projects you change the projects. And when you change the projects people’s behaviors change. And when behavior changes, culture changes.

The other important class of resources is people. When you change who runs the project, they change what work is done. And when they prioritize a different task, they prioritize different behavior of the teams. They ask for new work and get new behavior. And when those project leaders get to choose new people to do the work, they choose in a way that changes how the work is done. New project leaders change the high-level behaviors of the project and the people doing the work change the day-to-day behavior within the projects.

Change how projects are chosen and culture changes. Change who runs the projects and culture changes. Change who does the project work and culture changes.

Image credits: 1 of 850+ FREE quote slides available for download at http://misterinnovation.com

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Managing Team Conflict

Leave a reply

Managing Team Conflict

GUEST POST from David Burkus

Conflict within a team is an inevitable part of any work environment. The diverse perspectives, ideas, and solutions that team members bring to the table can often lead to disagreements and conflicts. However, it’s important to remember that team conflict isn’t necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it can be beneficial in many ways. It can help identify blind spots, explore different solutions, and find innovative ways to deliver on objectives. The key lies in managing these conflicts effectively.

Effective conflict management can lead to a more engaged team, improved performance, and overall growth. In this article, we will outline how to manage team conflict. We will delve into five key tactics: finding the root cause of the conflict, defining acceptable criteria, questioning assumptions, examining the impact of each solution, and switching perspectives to understand opposing viewpoints.

1. Find the Root Cause

Team Conflicts often arise from differing ideas about the best solution to a problem. Therefore, the first step in managing team conflict is to examine the problem and agree on its root cause. This involves finding common ground around how the team found itself in the current situation. It’s crucial to understand that before discussing solutions, the team must agree on what the problem is.

There are several techniques that can be used to analyze the root cause of a conflict. These include fishbone diagrams or the five whys method. These techniques can help the team to dig deeper into the problem and identify the underlying cause. Once the root cause is identified, it becomes easier to address the conflict and find a solution.

2. Define Acceptable Criteria

Once the root cause of team conflict has been identified, the next step is to set criteria for success before discussing solutions. This involves agreeing on the criteria that will define a successful solution. It’s important to discuss constraints such as time, cost, and responsibility. These factors often play a significant role in determining the feasibility of a solution.

It’s worth noting that disagreements about criteria can lead to conflict. Therefore, it’s important to define these upfront. By setting clear criteria, the team can ensure that everyone is on the same page and that the proposed solutions align with the agreed-upon success criteria.

3. Question Assumptions

Another important tactic in managing team conflict is to question assumptions. This involves gaining a deeper understanding and finding common ground by questioning assumptions about the world, individual capacities, and team capabilities. It’s crucial to avoid criticizing or dismissing ideas outright. Instead, ask for thoughts on specific aspects and encourage open discussion.

By questioning assumptions, people may rethink their solutions or discover flaws in their own thinking. This can lead to more innovative solutions and a better understanding of the problem at hand. It also fosters a culture of open communication and mutual respect within the team.

4. Examine the Impact

When considering potential solutions to a team conflict, it’s important to examine the impact of each solution. This involves exploring the potential consequences and trade-offs of implementing a particular solution. Consider the impact on other divisions, clients, society, and the media. Recognizing that every solution has trade-offs and unintended consequences is a crucial part of the decision-making process.

Examining the impact helps people realize the potential flaws or benefits of their ideas. It also encourages team members to think critically about their proposed solutions and consider the bigger picture. This can lead to more informed decision-making and better conflict resolution.

5. Switch Perspectives

The final tactic in managing team conflict is to switch perspectives. This involves considering opposing viewpoints and championing different ideas. Encourage team members to take on the perspective of others and understand their reasoning. This can help to gain empathy and find common ground.

By considering different viewpoints, a more suitable solution may be found, or a more productive conversation can take place. This not only helps in resolving the current conflict but also fosters a culture of empathy and understanding within the team, which can prevent future conflicts.

Managing conflict effectively is crucial for the growth and success of a team. It helps teams to grow, improve performance, and create a more engaging work experience. Managed well, conflict is what helps every member of the team do their best work ever.

Image credit: Pixabay

Originally published on DavidBurkus.com on January 6, 2024

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Transforming Leadership to Reshape the Future of Innovation

Leave a reply

Exclusive Interview with Brian Solis

Effective leadership serves as the crucial catalyst for both successful innovation and the profound transformation of any collective entity, be it an organization, a team, or even a country. Leaders are responsible for setting a compelling vision, articulating the ‘why’ behind the need for change, and fostering a culture where calculated risk-taking, experimentation, and learning from failure are not just tolerated, but actively encouraged. By championing new ideas, allocating resources strategically, empowering individuals, and navigating the inherent uncertainties of uncharted territory, leaders create the necessary environment for groundbreaking concepts to emerge and take root. Ultimately, it is the foresight, resilience, and guidance of strong leadership that enables groups to move beyond the status quo, adapt to evolving landscapes, and consciously shape a more innovative and prosperous future.

Today we will start with Gemini’s summarization of the global innovation community’s shared understanding surrounding the intersection of innovation, leadership, and the future above and dive deep into what it takes to make a leadership mindshift with our special guest.

Helping Leaders Make the Mindshift the Future Requires

I recently had the opportunity to interview Brian Solis, a world-renowned futurist, keynote speaker, and author of over 60 industry-leading research publications and 8 best-selling books exploring disruptive trends, corporate innovation, business transformation, and consumer behavior. Forbes has called him “one of the more creative and brilliant business minds of our time” and The Conference Board described Brian as “the futurist we all need now.”

Brian serves as the Head of Global Innovation at ServiceNow where he leads vision, strategy, and program innovation for the company’s global Innovation Centers. Brian also studies disruptive technologies, emergent trends, and market shifts to advise business executives on innovation and transformation strategies.

Brian continues to publish business and technology thought leadership in industry publications such as CIO, Forbes, and Worth, and has consistently been recognized as one of the world’s leading thinkers in innovation, business transformation, and leadership for over two decades. .

Below is the text of my interview with Brian and a preview of the kinds of insights you’ll find in Mindshift: Transform Leadership, Drive Innovation, and Reshape the Future presented in a Q&A format:

1. Let’s set the stage. Why is someone’s mindset so important and what is a mindshift?

Your mindset is the operating system for how you experience and interact with the world. It influences how you perceive reality, react to change, and ultimately determine the role you play in shaping the future.

A mindshift isn’t just a minor adjustment — it’s a fundamental rewiring of how we see, think, and operate. It’s the moment when you realize you don’t have to accept the status quo and instead begin to create new possibilities.

We’re living in an era where exponential change is the new normal. AI, automation, digital transformation — these aren’t just trends; they’re fundamentally reshaping industries and societies. Those who cling to legacy thinking will struggle. Those who embrace a mindshift — who become adaptable, curious, and proactive — will thrive.

A mindshift is about moving from passive observer to active architect of the future. Unlearn old patterns, embrace new perspectives, and take intentional action to drive meaningful change. It’s a choice. It’s a responsibility. And, ultimately, it’s a competitive advantage.

2. Why is it so easy for leaders to downplay potential disruptions?

Leaders often don’t see disruption coming—not because they’re unaware, but because they’re focused on optimizing the present. This comes at the cost designing the future. I call this the “other ROI,” which signifies return on ignorance. Ask, “what happens if I’m not asking different questions?” or “what’s the cost of not investing in alternate futures?” Many companies and executives operate in a legacy mindset, where efficiency, risk avoidance, and short-term gains take priority.

This creates a dangerous blind spot. Disruption doesn’t announce itself with a press release. It starts small, at the edges — emerging consumer behaviors, shifts in expectations, technological advancements that seem niche or “not our problem.” By the time these trends become impossible to ignore, it’s often too late.

Kodak is a classic example. They invented the digital camera but failed to embrace it because they were too invested in their film business. Taxi companies dismissed Uber as a niche alternative until it completely redefined the transportation industry. Blockbuster dismissed streaming early on, etc.

The irony? The very disruption leaders fear is also their biggest opportunity. Those who develop a mindshift — who cultivate foresight, agility, and a culture of continuous learning—don’t just react to disruption. They create it.

3. Classic question: Are leaders born or made, and why or how?

Leaders are made. Leadership is not a title, and it’s not something you inherit. It’s a mindset. It’s a set of behaviors and choices that anyone — at any level — can develop.

Yes, some people are naturally more charismatic or decisive or confident or vocal, but leadership isn’t about personality traits. It’s about genuine vision, courage, empathy, and the ability to inspire action.

The best leaders are not limited to those who have climbed the corporate ladder. They’re the ones who create ladders for others. They lift others up. They see problems others ignore, challenge assumptions, and take action when no one else will.

If leadership were purely an inborn trait, we wouldn’t see individuals from unexpected backgrounds rise to the occasion. Look at someone like Satya Nadella, who transformed Microsoft not just by making smart business moves, but by shifting its culture from one of competition to one of collaboration and innovation. Or look at the CEO of ServiceNow, Bill McDermott, who bought a deli at 16 and then sold Xeros copiers door-to-door after college.

The good news? Leadership is a skill. And like any skill, it can be developed — through self-awareness, learning, resilience, and a commitment to constant growth.

4. What are some of the best ways for people to become more self-aware?

Self-awareness is the foundation of a mindshift. Without it, we’re running on autopilot, reinforcing the very patterns that hold us back, but thinking we’re growing.

The first step is intentional reflection. Most of us operate in a reactive state, responding to emails, putting out fires, and navigating daily demands without ever stopping to ask: Why do I think this way? Why do I act this way? What assumptions am I carrying?

Here are some practical ways to build self-awareness:

Journaling – Write down your thoughts, decisions, and reactions. Over time, patterns emerge.
Feedback loops – Actively seek input from mentors, colleagues, and even those who challenge you.
Mindfulness practices – Simply taking a few moments to observe your thoughts rather than react to them can be transformative.
Personality and strengths assessments – Tools like StrengthsFinder or the Enneagram can provide valuable insights into your natural tendencies.
Board of Directors – Change who your surround yourself with. Without realizing, we often keep the company of those who keep us right where we are.
The “Why?” method – When you make a decision or hold a strong opinion, ask “Why?” five times. You might be surprised at the subconscious beliefs driving your actions.

5. What makes it hard for people to be optimistic? Or for some, to avoid being too optimistic?

Optimism is a powerful force — but it has to be grounded in reality.

Many people struggle with optimism because they’re conditioned to focus on risks and worst-case scenarios. We live in a world where negativity is amplified — headlines focus on crises, social media fuels outrage, and many corporate cultures reward problem-spotting over possibility-seeking.

On the other hand, unchecked optimism can be dangerous. If we ignore reality, we risk falling into wishful thinking, assuming everything will work out without taking the necessary action to make it work out.

The key is pragmatic optimism — the ability to see opportunities while also acknowledging challenges. It’s the belief that the future can be better, but only if we take responsibility for shaping it.

6. Most of our audience is aware of the Fixed vs. Growth Mindset concept, but are there key aspects of this concept that tend to be overlooked or underestimated?

Yes — many people misunderstand how to actually develop a growth mindset.

It’s easy to say, “I believe I can grow,” but without action, nothing changes.

Talking about taking action is not taking action. Thinking and dreaming about it, reading about it, learning from others who do it, planning for it, none of this is taking action.

The real key is deliberate discomfort. Growth doesn’t happen in our comfort zones—it happens when we actively seek out challenges that stretch us. You have to start with disrupting yourself.

Another overlooked aspect is environment. You can’t sustain a growth mindset if you’re surrounded by people who reinforce fixed thinking. Leaders must cultivate environments where learning, experimentation, and even failure are embraced.

A growth mindset isn’t just about believing in potential — it’s about practicing resilience, adaptability, and curiosity every single day.

7. What is the role of transcendence in achieving mindshift or the relationship between them?

I tell the story about transcendence and Maslov in the book. If you’re reading this now, I hope you read the book!

Transcendence is about breaking free from the mental constraints of the past. It’s about seeing beyond immediate challenges and into what’s possible.

A mindshift happens when we transcend our habitual ways of thinking, seeing, and being. It requires stepping outside our ego, our fears, and our assumptions to view the world—and our role in it — through a fresh lens.

Great leaders transcend the present to create the future. They don’t just accept reality; they challenge and redefine it. They become it.

8. What is the relationship or overlap between futurology and mindset shifting?

Futurology isn’t about predicting the future—it’s about anticipating and preparing for it. A mindshift allows us to anticipate and shape what’s coming, rather than react to it.

A future-ready mindset means continuously questioning assumptions, scanning for emerging trends, and developing the agility to pivot before disruption forces our hand.

9. What role does storytelling play in a mindset shift for an organization instead of an individual?

Storytelling is communication and can drive cultural transformation.

Organizations shift their collective mindset when leaders craft compelling narratives that connect people to a shared vision of the future.

The most successful change initiatives are fueled by stories that inspire belief, belonging, and action.

10. From your experience, what are some of the best ways to test your story before you start to tell it?

A great story isn’t told — it’s experienced. Before launching a new narrative, whether for an organization, a product, or a movement, it’s essential to validate it in the real world. Here’s how:

Start Small, Iterate Fast – Share your story with a small, trusted audience first—mentors, team members, or even a focus group. Observe their reactions. Are they engaged? Do they lean in? Do they see themselves in the story?
The Emotional Test – A great story moves people. If it doesn’t spark curiosity, excitement, or even tension, it might need refinement. If people just nod politely, go deeper—make it more personal, more relatable, or more urgent.
Reverse Engineer It – What reaction do you want? Is your story designed to drive action? To challenge assumptions? To inspire change? If it doesn’t achieve its intended purpose, revisit the framing.
Test Across Channels – Does your story hold up in a conversation? A blog post? A social media post? A keynote? A strong narrative should be adaptable yet consistent across different mediums.
Listen for the Retell Factor – The best stories get repeated. If people remember and share your message in their own words, you’ve got something powerful. If they struggle to summarize it, it might need simplification or more emotional depth.

A story goes beyond what you say—it’s what people hear, feel, and share. Make sure it resonates before you take it to a bigger stage.

11. What’s the biggest barrier to a mindshift, and how can people overcome it?

The biggest barrier? Fear of letting go.

People often cling to outdated beliefs, behaviors, and ways of working—not because they’re effective, but because they’re comfortable. Even when the evidence is clear that change is needed, there’s a psychological safety in the familiar.

Overcoming this requires intentional unlearning. The best way to do this?

Expose yourself to new ideas and perspectives – Read outside your industry. Talk to people with different viewpoints. Travel, even if it’s just to a different part of your city. Disruption often starts with who you surround yourself with.
Challenge your own beliefs – Ask yourself: What do I assume to be true that might not be? What if the opposite were true? This exercise alone can unlock powerful insights.
Get uncomfortable, on purpose – Growth doesn’t happen in the comfort zone. Seek experiences that stretch you—whether that’s public speaking, launching a bold new initiative, or simply saying “yes” to something that scares you.
Redefine failure – Failure isn’t the opposite of success; it’s part of the process. A mindshift happens when you stop fearing failure and start learning from it.
Surround yourself with catalysts – The people around you either reinforce old thinking or help you level up. Seek out those who challenge you, inspire you, and push you to see things differently.

A mindshift doesn’t happen to you. It happens because of you. And the more intentional you are about rewiring your thinking, the more unstoppable you become.

12. What’s one thing every leader should do today to future-proof themselves?

Start with reading Mindshift! 😉

Leaders today need vision.But they also need foresight. The world is shifting too fast for traditional leadership approaches to keep up.

So here’s a challenge: Block out 30 minutes every week to explore the future.

Study emerging trends (AI, automation, shifting workforce dynamics).
Read about what’s happening outside your industry.
Watch how Gen Z and Gen Alpha are interacting with technology.
Ask, “What does this mean for me? My industry? My team?”

The leaders who thrive in the future are the ones who anticipate it today. The best way to be ready for what’s next is to start thinking like the future, right now.

Conclusion

Thank you for the great conversation Brian!

I hope everyone has enjoyed this peek into the mind of the man behind the insightful new title Mindshift: Transform Leadership, Drive Innovation, and Reshape the Future!

Image credits: Brian Solis

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

How to Leverage Haters to Your Advantage

Leave a reply

How to Leverage Haters to Your Advantage

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

What can be hardest about change, especially when we feel passionately about it, is that at some point, we need to accept that others will not embrace it. Not every change is for everybody. Some will have to pursue a different journey, one to which they can devote their own passions and seek out their own truths.

Yet there’s something about human nature that makes us want to convince those who vehemently oppose our idea. That’s almost always a mistake. Often, the reason for their opposition has less to do with any rational argument than their identity and sense of self. For whatever reason, it offends their dignity.

Still, we can learn to love our haters, because they can often help us find the way forward. All too often, we end up preaching to the choir instead of venturing out of the church and mixing with the heathens. That’s how change efforts fail. On the other hand, if we can learn to use their tactics and rhetoric to our own advantage, we have a powerful weapon for change.

“Separate But Equal” as a Force for Justice

In 1896, the Supreme Court case of Plessy vs. Ferguson codified the doctrine of separate but equal into constitutional law, which allowed states to discriminate against black Americans. Many saw it as fundamentally unjust and argued passionately against it. But a brilliant lawyer named Charles Hamilton Houston saw it as an opportunity to use his opponent’s evil idea for good.

The principle of “separate but equal” was designed to prevent blacks from benefiting from common resources, such as a water fountain or a grade school. However, when applied to rare resources, such as a graduate school, its logic began to unravel. When a man named Lloyd Gaines was refused admission to the University of Missouri law school because he was black, Houston brought suit.

But he didn’t argue against “separate but equal.” In fact, he argued for it. Clearly if the State of Missouri was going to refuse Gaines admission, there had to be a separate but equal facility. Yet there was only one law school in the state and it would be out of the question for the state to build an entire law school just to satisfy the doctrine. The Supreme Court ruled in Gaines’ favor and he was admitted to the program.

Houston would continue to argue similar cases along with his protege, Thurgood Marshall, and began taking down Jim Crow brick by brick. Unfortunately, he would die of a heart attack in 1950, before Brown vs. The Board of Education would strike down the doctrine of “separate but equal” in 1954, but his legacy lives on through Howard University Law School, which he helped build and shape.

Using Arrests To Bring Down A Regime

One of the primary tools a repressive regime has to intimidate its citizens is arrests. Getting arrested being treated like a common criminal is scary and degrading. You are made to feel alone and helpless. Yet the Serbian movement Otpor was able to figure out how to turn arrests to their advantage so that they furthered, rather than weakened their cause.

The first step was preparation. The protesters were trained so that they knew what to expect during arrests and how to respond. One key procedure was to always have “reserve” activists at every action to observe what took place. If the police arrived and began taking the comrades away, they would alert teammates who would set a plan in motion.

Phone calls would immediately go out to lawyers, friendly journalists and international NGOs as well as musicians, actors and other celebrities. While the lawyers met with the police, a protest would be organized outside the precinct, including music, games and “Mothers of Otpor” who would demand to know why the police were abusing their children.

After the fall of the Milošević regime, internal documents made it clear how frustrated the police became with all of this. The protests outside the police stations, along with the media spotlight they created, would tie their precinct up for hours. Any brutality on their part would be publicized, undermining their authority further. Often, Otpor would get more and better publicity from the arrests than from the initial protests.

This is what my friend Srdja Popović calls a dilemma action because it puts your opponent in a bind. The police had two choices, they could either stop arresting Otpor activists or continue to arrest them, but either way Otpor would grow stronger.

Betting On The Muscle Of Electric Cars

Environmentalists make the case that the long-term dangers of pollution and climate change far exceed the costs of the short-term sacrifices required. They advise us to turn down the thermostat and wear a sweater in winter, check the air in our tires and buy small cars. Clearly, these are not insurmountable challenges with the fate of the planet in the balance.

Yet the truth is that people don’t like to be inconvenienced, especially when it comes to their cars. Americans in particular have always had a love affair with big, fast muscle cars. Sure, a Prius will get you from point “A” to point “B”, but you can’t feel POWERFUL. It’s like going to a steakhouse and only eating the vegetables.

That’s why the first electric vehicle Tesla came out with in 2008, the Roadster, was anything but “responsible. It was a $100,000 status symbol for Silicon Valley millionaires. Because these customers could afford multiple cars, range wasn’t as much of a concern, but in any case the high price tag made a larger battery more feasible.

Compare that to Shai Agassi and the strategy for his electric car company, Better Place, which was a much more expansive vision. Instead of building a high-performance sports car, he built a family car for the masses and sought to overcome the challenges of range through a network of battery switching stations. It blew through $700 million before it went bust.

Musk understood a car is far more than a mode of transportation. It is a part of people’s identity. You can ask people to change just about anything, except to stop being who they think they are.

Your Targets Determine Your Tactics

When we feel passionately about change, we want to take action. We want to take to the streets, argue against injustice. We want to make decisions, launch a business, get things done. Activity gives us something to point to. It’s something rather than nothing. When we take action we can tell ourselves that we’re not just sitting idly by.

Yet actions without a sound strategy are doomed to fail. That’s why we need to learn to love our haters. If we listen to them they will show us how to win. Charles Hamilton Houston could have railed against the doctrine of “separate but equal,” but he leveraged it to take down Jim Crow instead. Otpor used the Milošević regime’s own repressive tactics to their advantage. Elon Musk didn’t ask Tesla’s customers to sacrifice, but satisfied their desire for high-performance cars.

In each case, redefining the target made all the difference. “Separate but equal” was designed for grade schools, but its significance changed completely when applied to graduate programs. A cop on the beat is almost all-powerful, but vulnerable at a precinct. The Tesla Roadster wasn’t designed for regular families to use every day, but for millionaires to zip around in on the weekends.

To change the world, we need to learn to see it differently. We can’t just fight the same losing battles. We need to redefine the terms of our struggle in ways that tilt the playing field to our advantage. In the final analysis, that’s what makes the difference between people who want to make a point and those who actually make a difference.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credits: Pixabay

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Why So Many Smart People Are Foolish

1 Reply

Why So Many Smart People Are Foolish

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

When I lived in Moscow, my gym was just a five-minute walk from my flat. So rather than use a locker, I would just run over in my shorts and a jacket no matter what the weather was. The locals thought I was crazy. Elderly Russians would sometimes scream at me to go home and get dressed properly.

I had always heard that Russians were impervious to the effects of weather, but the truth is that they get cold just like the rest of us. We tend to mythologize the unknown. Our brains work in strange ways, soaking up patterns from what we see. Often, however, those experiences are unreliable, such as the Hollywood images that helped shape my views about Russians and their impenetrability.

The problem is that myths often feel more real than facts. We have a tendency to seize on information that is most accessible, not the most accurate, and then interpret new evidence based on that prior perception. We need to accept that we can’t avoid our own cognitive biases. The unavoidable truth is that we’re easiest to fool when we think we’re being clever.

Inventing Myths

When Jessica Pressler first published her story about Anna Sorokin in New York Magazine, it could scarcely be believed. A Russian emigrant, with no assets to speak of, somehow managed to convince the cream of New York society that she was, in fact, a wealthy German heiress and swindled them out of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Her crimes pale in comparison to Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos, who made fools of the elites on the opposite coast. Attracting a powerful board that included Henry Kissinger (but no one with expertise in life sciences), the 20-something entrepreneur convinced investors that she had invented a revolutionary blood testing technology and was able to attract $700 million.

In both cases, there was no shortage of opportunities to unmask the fraud. Anna Sorokin left unpaid bills all over town. Despite Holmes’s claims, she wasn’t able to produce a single peer-reviewed study that her technology worked even after 10 years in business. There were no shortage of whistle blowers from inside and outside the company.

Still, many bought the ruses and would interpret facts to support them. Sorokin’s unpaid bills were seen as proof of her wealth. After all, who but the fabulously rich could be so nonchalant with money? In Holmes’ case, her eccentricities were taken as evidence that she truly was a genius, in the mold of Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg.

The Halo Effect

People like Sorokin and Holmes intentionally prey on our weaknesses. Whenever anybody tried to uncover the facts, they threw elaborate defenses, making counter-accusations of any who dared to question them. Often, they used relationships with powerful people to protect them. At Theranos, there was very strict corporate security and an army of lawyers.

Still, it doesn’t have to be so diabolical. As Phil Rosenzweig explains in The Halo Effect, when a company is doing well, we tend to see every aspect of the organization in a positive light. We assume a profitable company has wise leadership, motivated employees and a sound strategy. At the same time, we see the traits of poorly performing firms in a negative light.

But what if it’s the same company? Rosenzweig points out that, when Cisco was at its peak before the dot-com bust, it was said to have an “extreme customer focus.” But a year later, when things turned south, Cisco was criticized for “a cavalier attitude toward potential customers” and “irksome” sales policies. Did its culture really change so much in a year?

Business pundits, in ways very similar to swindlers, prey on how our minds work. When they say that companies that employ risky strategies outperform others who don’t, they are leveraging survivorship bias and, of course, firms that took big risks and failed are never counted in the analysis. When consulting companies survey industry executives, they are relying more on social proof than uncovering expert opinion.

The Principle Of Reflexivity

In the early 70’s, a young MBA student named Michael Milken noticed that debt that was considered below investment grade could provide higher risk-adjusted returns than other investments. He decided to create a market for the so-called junk bonds and, by the 80’s, was making a ton of money.

Then everybody else piled on and the value of the bonds increased so much that they became a bad investment. Nevertheless, investors continued to rush in. Inevitably, the bubble popped and the market crashed as the crowds rushed for the exit. Many who were considered “smart money” lost billions.

That’s what George Soros calls reflexivity. Expectations aren’t formed in a vacuum, but in the context of other’s expectations. If many believe that the stock market will go up, we’re more likely to believe it too. That makes the stock market actually go up, which only adds fuel to the fire. Nobody wants to get left out of a good thing.

Very few ever seem to learn this lesson and that’s why people like Anna Sorokin and Elizabeth Holmes are able to play us for suckers. We are wired to conform and the effect extends widely throughout our social networks. The best indication of what we believe is not any discernible fact pattern, but what those around us happen to believe.

Don’t Believe Everything You Think

One of the things that I’ve learned over the years is that it’s best to assume people are smart, hardworking and well-intentioned. Of course, that’s not always true, but we don’t learn much from dismissing people as stupid, lazy and crooked. And if we don’t learn from others’ mistakes, then how can we avoid the same failures?

Often, smart people get taken in because they’re smart. They have a track record of seeing things others don’t, making good bets and winning big. People give them deference, come to them for advice and laugh at their jokes. They’re used to seeing things others don’t. For them, a lack of discernible evidence isn’t always a warning sign. It can be an opportunity.

We all need to check ourselves so that we don’t believe everything that we think. There are formal processes that can help, such as pre-mortems and red teams, but most of all we need to own up to the flaws in our own brains. We have a tendency to see patterns that aren’t really there and to double down on bad ideas once we’ve committed to them.

As Richard Feynman famously put it, “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.” Smart people get taken in so easily because they forget that basic principle. They mythologize themselves and become the heroes of their own stories. That’s why there will always be more stories like “Inventing Anna” and Theranos.

Suckers are born every minute and, invariably, they think they’re playing it smart.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credits: Unsplash

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.