Executive Coaching
112 views | +0 today
Follow
 
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Leadership in Distance Education
onto Executive Coaching
Scoop.it!

More than 100,000 people are taking an online course from Yale. Here’s what it means for the future of education.

More than 100,000 people are taking an online course from Yale. Here’s what it means for the future of education. | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
An online course at Yale offers a window into the future of education.

Via Dr. Susan Bainbridge
Donna Karlin's insight:

Harvard and now Yale joins the MOOC world. FINALLY a way to continuously learn without the expense or relocation of having to be on campus without compromising quality education.

more...
Monica S Mcfeeters's curator insight, February 22, 2014 10:53 AM

Wow! This is an amazing window into the future!

Ante Lauc's curator insight, February 24, 2014 8:05 AM

How to find what is relevant to live love and freedom?

Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

HR Magazine - How to build trust in organisations

HR Magazine - How to build trust in organisations | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Donna Karlin's insight:

Trust can't be repaired. It has to be rebuilt from the ground up.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Interesting Reading
Scoop.it!

These 12 Habits Are Killing Your Productivity.. Fix Them Today.

These 12 Habits Are Killing Your Productivity.. Fix Them Today. | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it

Everyday comes with new challenges you are expected to overcome and tasks you are supposed to accomplish by the end of the working day. 


And guess what, it never ends.There is always something to do. And the more you take on, the more there is to do. Your productivity may be suffering in the process and you may not even know it.


Via Ivo Nový
more...
donhornsby's curator insight, May 12, 2014 9:23 AM

Is is possible that these habits are killing your ability to be productive?

Ivon Prefontaine's curator insight, May 12, 2014 1:01 PM

It is interesting that having hierarchies was not included. The points about to-do lists and constantly meeting is School writ large. Consider the use of curricula as a large scale to-do list.

Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Good News For A Change
Scoop.it!

How to Overcome a Fear of Failure

How to Overcome a Fear of Failure | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Acceptance, adjustment, and adaptation are critical to overcoming obstacles.

Via Bobby Dillard
more...
John Michel's curator insight, February 7, 2014 12:57 PM

What is the best way to overcome a fear of failure? Cultivate the confidence to be able to embrace failing and to learn how to pivot when things don’t go your way.

Graeme Reid's curator insight, February 9, 2014 6:28 PM

Fear is a natural thing to feel when doing something new, but resilience and flexibility will help minimise the chances of failure.

Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

Use Data To Support Arguments, Not Arguments To Support Data

Use Data To Support Arguments, Not Arguments To Support Data | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Use Data To Support Arguments, Not Arguments To Support Data.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

ACEC Announces Yet Another Program for Senior Level Executive Coaches, Given by One of Its Members—Donna Karlin

ACEC Announces Yet Another Program for Senior Level Executive Coaches, Given by One of Its Members—Donna Karlin | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Donna Karlin's insight:


Powerful and practical techniques of gathering actionable data for in-the-moment leadership and professional development

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

Emotional Agility

Donna Karlin's insight:

Your unspoken thoughts greatly affect how you frame and language your communication. How emotionally agile are you? #EI #Leadership

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Radical Compassion
Scoop.it!

Three things required for resilience | Aspire-CS

Three things required for resilience | Aspire-CS | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it

Resilience allows you to weather the bumps of life. Leaders need to be resilient to help others become and stay resilient. I’ve been lucky in life that I had a number of leaders (many without a title) who helped me to be resilient and to pay it forward to others.

 

I grew up in a dysfunctional, addicted, and abusive family. I learned to get support from outside the immediate family to help me see that what I experienced could be overcome. My grandmother helped me to understand the importance of a post-high school education and my closest friends were college bound and cheering me on.

 

Because I knew that my education would be key to a better future, I worked hard at my classes, even the most difficult ones (like organic chemistry and physics!). My professors believed in me, helping me to discover that through hard work, I could do well my classes.

 

After college, I was hired into an organization that provided me with lots of opportunities for growth and development. I loved working there. When an acquisition occurred after many years at the company and I was part of a massive layoff, I somehow knew I’d be okay. I didn’t experience the anger or sadness that others did. With some perspective, persistence, and support, I was able to help others weather the storm.

 

I’m proud of how my past has shaped my present and will impact my future. My hardiness has come from inside, but it’s also been fostered and supported by others.

 

But wait! There are lessons for leaders in all of this personal rambling! I’ve learned some lessons about resilience, and how a leader can foster it in their organization during tough times with:

 

Perspective: In almost every situation that can knock you or your employees off their feet, you can find perspective if you look for it. Ask yourself (even in the midst of a corporate restructuring, a job loss, or a dysfunctional organization), “What’s the worst that could happen?”. If you look beyond the immediate state of affairs you’re dealing with, you may even see that there is opportunity there. Better yet, your job is to help yourself and those you lead to envision something beyond the immediate tough times.

 

Persistence: When times are tough, you need to “lead the way”. This means that you don’t give up on yourself or on others, but use your strength and courage to guide yourself and those around you to forge ahead to a better future. You can’t go back to the past and the immediate situation may be unchangeable. When you are able to see ahead and lead others to what’s possible, they’ll thrive and become more resilient.

 

Support: You’ll need the support of a colleague, friend, family or coach. This is important for you and for the support you’ll need to provide to others who need you to lead at your best. Asking for help in tough times is a sign of strength, not weakness. Support from an empathetic, listening ear will help you to model the same to your employees when they need it.

 

You can make a difference by helping others to stay resilient in the bumps of life by modeling it yourself. Make sure you approach tough times with perspective, persistence and support to help others to weather the bumps. - See more at: http://www.aspire-cs.com/three-things-required-for-resilience#sthash.B5P35yPM.dpuf


Via Jim Manske
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

What is executive coaching – and do you need it? | DestinyConnect

What is executive coaching – and do you need it? | DestinyConnect | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Gain business acumen, great lifestyle tips, build and hone your entrepreneur sklls through a diverse and global network.
Donna Karlin's insight:

Coaching doesn't fix people...it grows people. Who wouldn't benefit from seeing beyond what they already know, about life and themselves within it?

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Business Improvement
Scoop.it!

Work on Your Business, Not In It for Success

Work on Your Business, Not In It for Success | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it

Via Daniel Watson
more...
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

Association of Corporate Executive Coaches (ACEC) Establishes Continuing ... - Newsday

Association of Corporate Executive Coaches (ACEC) Establishes Continuing ... - Newsday | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
Association of Corporate Executive Coaches (ACEC) Establishes Continuing ...
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from LeadershipABC
Scoop.it!

Six Key Servant Leadership Attributes

Six Key Servant Leadership Attributes | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it

The 21st century has brought much in the way of turmoil and change to the world of business. As a consequence, ways of doing business that were once universally accepted now seem outdated and inflexible in an age where knowledge drives economies and socially responsible corporate attitudes influence stakeholders and shareholders alike.


With such changes have come new priorities and responsibilities and it is in this environment that the theory of servant leadership has flourished as a management style for the redefined business world of today, one that can serve as a cornerstone for organisations wishing to build corporate structures based on stewardship, empowerment and trust.

Via Kenneth Mikkelsen
Donna Karlin's insight:

Humility, authenticity, interpersonal acceptance...the way to #HumanBasedLeadership

more...
donhornsby's curator insight, May 14, 2014 10:35 AM

(From the article) Servant leadership will benefit organisations dependent on knowledge workers and in environments where high levels of creativity and innovation are the norm. Knowledge workers in particular require a sense of autonomy in order to function at their best and it is the responsibility of the servant leader to create this workplace freedom for them.

Empowerment's curator insight, May 16, 2014 12:00 AM

Ce qui est frappant, c'est la résurgence de ce modèle de management déjà pratiqué dans l'histoire puis oublié 

David Hain's curator insight, May 21, 2014 9:44 AM

Where there is not community, trust, respect, ethical behaviour are difficult for the young to learn and for the old to maintain.” ~ Robert Greenleaf

Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Leadership in Distance Education
Scoop.it!

More than 100,000 people are taking an online course from Yale. Here’s what it means for the future of education.

More than 100,000 people are taking an online course from Yale. Here’s what it means for the future of education. | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
An online course at Yale offers a window into the future of education.

Via Dr. Susan Bainbridge
Donna Karlin's insight:

Harvard and now Yale joins the MOOC world. FINALLY a way to continuously learn without the expense or relocation of having to be on campus without compromising quality education.

more...
Monica S Mcfeeters's curator insight, February 22, 2014 10:53 AM

Wow! This is an amazing window into the future!

Ante Lauc's curator insight, February 24, 2014 8:05 AM

How to find what is relevant to live love and freedom?

Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Executive Coaching
Scoop.it!

Three Steps To Overcome Your Fear Of Delegation

Three Steps To Overcome Your Fear Of Delegation | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
For most entrepreneurs, delegation is downright scary; we worry that we're losing control or being "bossy." Elizabeth Grace Saunders offers a cure.

Via The People Development Network, Roger Francis, Donna Karlin
Donna Karlin's insight:

Any of these sound familiar?

more...
John Michel's curator insight, November 1, 2013 11:27 AM

By delegating, you are decreasing the chance that you’ll burn out and that important activities only you can do won’t get done. Real control comes from managing risk and releasing control in appropriate ways.

Kenneth Børgesen's curator insight, November 2, 2013 6:44 AM

The heroic leader is dead long time ago.  Leadership is already distributed in successful businesses today But it is obviously not that easy for the entrepreneur to let go of something that is one's own "child". However business problems today are too wicked, intertwined and deeply rooted in globality for one person to even begin to understand. So gain control by letting go ...

Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

Finding your leadership voice - Strategies

There are a multitude of personality and leadership style assessments you can consult to provide insights into how you process information and react in various situations.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Donna Karlin from New Leadership
Scoop.it!

Three Steps To Overcome Your Fear Of Delegation

Three Steps To Overcome Your Fear Of Delegation | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
For most entrepreneurs, delegation is downright scary; we worry that we're losing control or being "bossy." Elizabeth Grace Saunders offers a cure.

Via The People Development Network, Roger Francis
more...
John Michel's curator insight, November 1, 2013 11:27 AM

By delegating, you are decreasing the chance that you’ll burn out and that important activities only you can do won’t get done. Real control comes from managing risk and releasing control in appropriate ways.

Kenneth Børgesen's curator insight, November 2, 2013 6:44 AM

The heroic leader is dead long time ago.  Leadership is already distributed in successful businesses today But it is obviously not that easy for the entrepreneur to let go of something that is one's own "child". However business problems today are too wicked, intertwined and deeply rooted in globality for one person to even begin to understand. So gain control by letting go ...

Donna Karlin's curator insight, February 3, 2014 4:47 PM

Any of these sound familiar?

Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Leadership and Development
Scoop.it!

7 Tips For Giving Feedback (and Making It a Lot Less Difficult, Too)

7 Tips For Giving Feedback (and Making It a Lot Less Difficult, Too) | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
How do you feel when it’s that time to provide “feedback” to your team?

Via Anna Conrad
more...
donhornsby's curator insight, October 10, 2013 7:23 AM

(From the article): Here’s where it all comes together. You can provide context and consequences, and, you can leave the choice of action to the employee. But the bottom line is, you are the leader and you are the one held ultimately accountable for the overall performance.

 

Keeping that role in perspective can help you provide the sincere, honest feedback. This is your job, and the ultimate decisions about the work of the team falls to you.

 

You aren’t their friend, you’re their leader and your responsibility is to provide open and candid feedback. It is their choice to accept it or not.

Chris Brown's curator insight, October 11, 2013 3:49 PM

Some great tips... especially #1 and #2.  Which one resonates to you?

Sylvie Houliere - Mayca's curator insight, October 16, 2013 5:22 AM

L'art du feedback ets un art difficile. Quelques conseils clairs et simples à lire dans cet article.

Rescooped by Donna Karlin from Radical Compassion
Scoop.it!

8 Common Mistakes in How Our Brains Think and How to Prevent Them - Belle Beth Cooper

8 Common Mistakes in How Our Brains Think and How to Prevent Them - Belle Beth Cooper | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it

Get ready to have your mind blown.

 

I was seriously shocked at some of these mistakes in thinking that I subconsciously make all the time. Obviously, none of them are huge, life-threatening mistakes, but they are really surprising and avoiding them could help us to make more rational, sensible decisions.

 

Being aware of the mistakes we naturally have in our thinking can make a big difference in avoiding them. Unfortunately, most of these occur subconsciously, so it will also take time and effort to avoid them—if you even want to.

 

Regardless, I think it’s fascinating to learn more about how we think and make decisions every day, so let’s take a look at some of these thinking habits we didn’t know we had.

 

1. We surround ourselves with information that matches our beliefs

We tend to like people who think like us. If we agree with someone’s beliefs, we’re more likely to be friends with them. While this makes sense, it means that we subconsciously begin to ignore or dismiss anything that threatens our world views, since we surround ourselves with people and information that confirm what we already think.

 

This is called confirmation bias. If you’ve ever heard of the frequency illusion, this is very similar. The frequency illusion occurs when you buy a new car, and suddenly you see the same car everywhere. Or when a pregnant woman suddenly notices other pregnant women all over the place. It’s a passive experience, where our brains seek out information that’s related to us, but we believe there’s been an actual increase in the frequency of those occurrences.

 

Confirmation bias is a more active form of the same experience. It happens when we proactively seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs.

 

Not only do we do this with the information we take in, but we approach our memories this way, as well. In an experiment in 1979 at the University of Minnesota, participants read a story about a women called Jane who acted extroverted in some situations and introverted in others. When the participants returned a few days later, they were divided into two groups. One group was asked if Jane would be suited to a job as a librarian, the other group were asked about her having a job as a real-estate agent. The librarian group remembered Jane as being introverted and later said that she would not be suited to a real-estate job. The real-estate group did the exact opposite: they remembered Jane as extroverted, said she would be suited to a real-estate job and when they were later asked if she would make a good librarian, they said no.

 

In 2009, a study at Ohio State showed that we will spend 36 percent more time reading an essay if it aligns with our opinions. "Whenever your opinions or beliefs are so intertwined with your self-image you couldn’t pull them away without damaging your core concepts of self, you avoid situations which may cause harm to those beliefs." – David McRaney

 

This trailer for David McRaney’s book, You are Now Less Dumb, explains this concept really well with a story about how people used to think geese grew on trees (seriously), and how challenging our beliefs on a regular basis is the only way to avoid getting caught up in the confirmation bias.

 

2. We believe in the “swimmer’s body” illusion

 

This has to be one of my favorite thinking mistakes I came across. In Rolf Dobelli’s book, The Art of Thinking Clearly, he explains how our ideas about talent and extensive training are well off-track: "Professional swimmers don’t have perfect bodies because they train extensively. Rather, they are good swimmers because of their physiques. How their bodies are designed is a factor for selection and not the result of their activities."

 

The “swimmer’s body illusion” occurs when we confuse selection factors with results. Another good example is top performing universities: are they actually the best schools, or do they choose the best students, who do well regardless of the school’s influence?

 

What really jumped out at me when researching this section was this particular line from Dobelli’s book: "Without this illusion, half of advertising campaigns would not work."

 

It makes perfect sense, when you think about it. If we believed that we were predisposed to be good at certain things (or not), we wouldn’t buy into ad campaigns that promised to improve our skills in areas where it’s unlikely we’ll ever excel.

 

3. We worry about things we’ve already lost

 

No matter how much I pay attention to the sunk cost fallacy, I still naturally gravitate towards it.

 

The term sunk cost refers to any cost (not just monetary, but also time and effort) that has been paid already and cannot be recovered. So, a payment of time or money that’s gone forever, basically.

 

The reason we can’t ignore the cost, even though it’s already been paid, is that we wired to feel loss far more strongly than gain. Psychologist Daniel Kahneman explains this in his book, Thinking Fast and Slow: "Organisms that placed more urgency on avoiding threats than they did on maximizing opportunities were more likely to pass on their genes. So, over time, the prospect of losses has become a more powerful motivator on your behavior than the promise of gains. The sunk cost fallacy plays on this tendency of ours to emphasize loss over gain."

 

This research study is a great example of how it works: Hal Arkes and Catehrine Blumer created an experiment in 1985 which demonstrated your tendency to go fuzzy when sunk costs come along. They asked subjects to assume they had spent $100 on a ticket for a ski trip in Michigan, but soon after found a better ski trip in Wisconsin for $50 and bought a ticket for this trip too. They then asked the people in the study to imagine they learned the two trips overlapped and the tickets couldn’t be refunded or resold. Which one do you think they chose, the $100 good vacation, or the $50 great one?

Over half of the people in the study went with the more expensive trip. It may not have promised to be as fun, but the loss seemed greater.

 

So, just like the other mistakes I’ve explained in this post, the sunk cost fallacy leads us to miss or ignore the logical facts presented to us, and instead make irrational decisions based on our emotions—without even realizing we’re doing so:

 

The fallacy prevents you from realizing the best choice is to do whatever promises the better experience in the future, not which negates the feeling of loss in the past.

 

Being such a subconscious reaction, it’s hard to avoid this one. Our best bet is to try to separate the current facts we have from anything that happened in the past. For instance, if you buy a movie ticket only to realize the movie is terrible, you could either:

a) stay and watch the movie, to “get your money’s worth” since you’ve already paid for the ticket (sunk cost fallacy)

or
b) leave the cinema and use that time to do something you’ll actually enjoy.

The thing to remember is this: you can’t get that investment back. It’s gone.

 

Don’t let it cloud your judgement in whatever decision you’re making in this moment—let it remain in the past.

 

4. We incorrectly predict odds

 

Imagine you’re playing Heads or Tails with a friend. You flip a coin, over and over, each time guessing whether it will turn up heads or tails. You have a 50/50 chance of being right each time.

 

Now suppose you’ve flipped the coin five times already and it’s turned up heads every time. Surely, surely, the next one will be tails, right? The chances of it being tails must be higher now, right?

Well, no. The chances of tails turning up are 50/50. Every time. Even if you turned up heads the last twenty times. The odds don’t change.

 

The gambler’s fallacy is a glitch in our thinking—once again, we’re proven to be illogical creatures. The problem occurs when we place too much weight on past events, believing that they will have an effect on future outcomes (or, in the case of Heads or Tails, any weight, since past events make absolutely no difference to the odds).

 

Unfortunately, gambling addictions in particular are also affected by a similar mistake in thinking—the positive expectation bias. This is when we mistakenly think that eventually, our luck has to change for the better. Somehow, we find it impossible to accept bad results and give up—we often insist on keeping at it until we get positive results, regardless of what the odds of that happening actually are.

 

5. We rationalize purchases we don’t want

 

I’m as guilty of this as anyone. How many times have you gotten home after a shopping trip only to be less than satisfied with your purchase decisions and started rationalizing them to yourself? Maybe you didn’t really want it after all, or in hindsight you thought it was too expensive. Or maybe it didn’t do what you hoped, and was actually useless to you.

 

Regardless, we’re pretty good at convincing ourselves that those flashy, useless, badly thought-out purchases are necessary after all. This is known as post-purchase rationalization or Buyer’s Stockholm Syndrome.

 

The reason we’re so good at this comes back to psychology: Social psychologists say it stems from the principle of commitment, our psychological desire to stay consistent and avoid a state of cognitive dissonance.

 

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we get when we’re trying to hold onto two competing ideas or theories. For instance, if we think of ourselves as being nice to strangers, but then we see someone fall over and don’t stop to help them, we would then have conflicting veiws about ourselves: we are nice to strangers, but we weren’t nice to the stranger who fell over. This creates so much discomfort that we have to change our thinking to match our actions—i.e. we start thinking of ourselves as someone who is not nice to strangers, since that’s what our actions proved.

 

So in the case of our impulse shopping trip, we would need to rationalize the purchases until we truly believe we needed to buy those things, so that our thoughts about ourselves line up with our actions (making the purchases).

The tricky thing in avoiding this mistake is that we generally act before we think, leaving us to rationalize our actions afterwards.

 

Being aware of this mistake can help us avoid it by predicting it before taking action—for instance, as we’re considering a purchase, we often know that we will have to rationalize it to ourselves later. If we can recognize this, perhaps we can avoid it. It’s not an easy one to tackle, though!

 

6. We make decisions based on the anchoring effect

 

Dan Ariely is a behavioural economist who gave one of my favorite TED talks ever about the irrationality of the human brain when it comes to making decisions.

 

He illustrates this particular mistake in our thinking superbly, with multiple examples. The anchoring effect essentially works like this: rather than making a decision based on pure value for investment (time, money, etc.), we factor in comparative value—that is, how much value an option offers when compared to another option.

 

Let’s look at some examples from Dan, to illustrate this effect in practice:

One example is an experiment that Dan conducted using two kinds of chocolates for sale in a booth: Hershey’s Kisses and Lindt Truffles. The Kisses were one penny each, while the Truffles were fifteen cents each. Considering the quality differences between the two kinds of chocolates and the normal prices of both items, the Truffles were a great deal, and the majority of visitors to the booth chose the Truffles.

 

For the next stage of his experiment, Dan offered the same two choices, but lowered the prices by one cent each. So now the Kisses were free, and the Truffles cost fourteen cents each. Of course, the Truffles are even more of a bargain now, but since the Kisses were free, most people chose those instead.

 

Your loss aversion system is always vigilant, waiting on standby to keep you from giving up more than you can afford to spare, so you calculate the balance between cost and reward whenever possible. – You Are Not So Smart

Another example Dan offers in his TED talk is when consumers are given holiday options to choose between. When given a choice of a trip to Rome, all expenses paid, or a similar trip to Paris, the decision is quite hard. Each city comes with its own food, culture and travel experiences that the consumer must choose between.

 

When a third option is added, however, such as the same Rome trip, but without coffee included in the morning, things change. When the consumer sees that they have to pay 2,50 euros for coffee in the third trip option, not only does the original Rome trip suddenly seem superior out of these two, it also seems superior to the Paris trip. Even though they probably hadn’t even considered whether coffee was included or not before the third option was added.

 

Here’s an even better example from another of Dan’s experiments:

Dan found this real ad for subscriptions to The Economist, and used it to see how a seemingly useless choice (like Rome without coffee) affects our decisions.

 

To begin with, there were three choices: subscribe to The Economist web version for $59, the print version for $125, or subscribe to both the print and web versions for $125. It’s pretty clear what the useless option is here. When Dan gave this form to 100 MIT students and asked them which option they would choose, 84% chose the combo deal for $125. 16% chose the cheaper, web-only option, and nobody chose the print-only option for $125.

 

Next, Dan removed the ‘useless’ print-only option which nobody wanted and tried the experiment with another group of 100 MIT students. This time, the majority chose the cheaper, web-only version, and the minority chose the combo deal. So even though nobody wanted the bad-value $125 print-only option, it wasn’t actually useless—in fact, it actually informed the decisions people made between the two other options by making the combo deal seem more valuable in relation.

 

This mistake is called the anchoring effect, because we tend to focus on a particular value and compare it to our other options, seeing the difference between values rather than the value of each option itself.

 

Eliminating the ‘useless’ options ourselves as we make decisions can help us choose more wisely. On the other hand, Dan says that a big part of the problem comes from simply not knowing our own preferences very well, so perhaps that’s the area we should focus on more, instead.

 

7. We believe our memories more than facts

 

Our memories are highly fallible and plastic. And yet, we tend to subconsciously favor them over objective facts. The availability heuristic is a good example of this. It works like this: Suppose you read a page of text and then you’re asked whether the page includes more words that end in “ing” or more words with “n” as the second-last letter. Obviously, it would be impossible for there to be more “ing” words than words with “n” as their penultimate letter (it took me a while to get that—read over the sentence again, carefully, if you’re not sure why that is).However, words ending in “ing” are easier to recall than words like hand, end, or and, which have “n” as their second-last letter, so we would naturally answer that there are more “ing” words.

 

What’s happening here is that we are basing our answer of probability (i.e. whether it’s probable that there are more “ing” words on the page) on how available relevant examples are (i.e. how easily we can recall them). Our troubles in recalling words with “n” as the second last letter make us think those words don’t occur very often, and we subconsciously ignore the obvious facts in front of us.

 

Although the availability heuristic is a natural process in how we think, two Chicago scholars have explained how wrong it can be:

 

Yet reliable statistical evidence will outperform the availability heuristic every time.

The lesson here? Whenever possible, look at the facts. Examine the data. Don’t base a factual decision on your gut instinct without at least exploring the data objectively first.

 

8. We pay more attention to stereotypes than we think

 

The funny thing about lots of these thinking mistakes is that they’re so ingrained, I had to think long and hard about why they’re mistakes at all! This one is a good example—it took me a while to understand how illogical this pattern of thinking is.

It’s another one that explains how easily we ignore actual facts:

 

The human mind is so wedded to stereotypes and so distracted by vivid descriptions that it will seize upon them, even when they defy logic, rather than upon truly relevant facts.

Here’s an example to illustrate the mistake, from researchers Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky:

In 1983 Kahneman and Tversky tested how illogical human thinking is by describing the following imaginary person: Linda is thirty-one years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in antinuclear demonstrations.

 

The researchers asked people to read this description, and then asked them to answer this question: Which alternative is more probable?

 

1. Linda is a bank teller.

2. Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.

 

Here’s where it can get a bit tricky to understand (at least, it did for me!)—If answer #2 is true, #1 is also true. This means that #2 cannot be the answer to the question of probability.

 

Unfortunately, few of us realize this, because we’re so overcome by the more detailed description of #2. Plus, as the earlier quote pointed out, stereotypes are so deeply ingrained in our minds that subconsciously apply them to others.

 

Roughly 85% of people chose option #2 as the answer.

 

Again, we see here how irrational and illogical we can be, even when the facts are seemingly obvious.

 

I love this quote from researcher Daniel Kahneman on the differences between economics and psychology: I was astonished. My economic colleagues worked in the building next door, but I had not appreciated the profound difference between our intellectual worlds. To a psychologist, it is self-evident that people are neither fully rational nor completely selfish, and that their tastes are anything but stable.

 

Clearly, it’s normal for us to be irrational and to think illogically, even though we rarely realize we’re doing it. Still, being aware of the pitfalls we often fall into when making decisions can help us to at least recognize them, if not avoid them.


Via Jim Manske
more...
Troy Crayton's curator insight, October 4, 2013 3:00 PM

Thank you for making us "aware" of this article, Duane....

donhornsby's curator insight, October 7, 2013 9:52 AM

(From the article): Clearly, it’s normal for us to be irrational and to think illogically, especially when language acts as a limitation to how we think, even though we rarely realize we’re doing it. Still, being aware of the pitfalls we often fall into when making decisions can help us to at least recognize them, if not avoid them.

Have you come across any other interesting mistakes we make in the way we think?

Lawrence Lanoff's curator insight, December 30, 2013 12:18 AM

This article is dense, but profound. Worth chomping on if you have some time. 

Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

How_To_Choose_a_Coach.pdf

Donna Karlin's insight:

Many people ask how to work with a coach, how to choose the right coach and what they have to do to get the most out of coaching. Here are some tips

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Donna Karlin
Scoop.it!

Develop Leadership Strengths By Building Around Them

Develop Leadership Strengths By Building Around Them | Executive Coaching | Scoop.it
It has become vogue in talent management to focus on strengths as a means to developing leadership skills.
Donna Karlin's insight:

What don't you know that you need to know?

more...
No comment yet.