“Are you a dog person or a cat person?”
My typical response to this question involves a lengthy explanation about my current pets, the pets I had growing up, and the fact that I am one of those people who enjoys both dogs and cats. Of course I know plenty of people who only enjoy dogs, or who think dogs are ridiculous and have adopted cats instead. I know others like me who enjoy both, and still others who don’t like pets at all. I even know people who inexplicably think that it’s okay to keep in their homes animals that have scales, or fins, or feathers, or more than four legs.
In light of all this nuance, my response probably should be something along the lines of “that’s a stupid question.” A much better question would be, “What kind of pets do you enjoy having or being around?” And yet, somehow, “Are you a dog person or a cat person?” is considered a reasonable inquiry in our culture.
The key here is culture, because here in America we are big fans of dualities and dichotomies and thinking in binary. We like to pretend that there are exactly two sides to any issue or dispute. We like to figure out if people are in our camp or the “other” camp. This shows up in our politics, where we’re expected to be able to sum up our view with one of two labels—red or blue, conservative or liberal, pro-choice or pro-life, gun rights or gun control, Democrat or Republican. When people try to point out that there’s much more to each of these issues than two simple options, we don’t hear it. Two simple options are much easier for each of us to digest and work with. Are you with me or against me? That’s all I need to know.
This spills over into other areas of our culture as well. There’s the aforementioned “dog person or cat person” question, but there’s also introvert or extrovert? Religious or atheist? Chocolate or vanilla? We love to narrow complex and nuanced issues down to two choices. This or that.
So what? When you’re making strategic choices, know that this is a possible bias of yours, and check yourself to see if you’ve narrowed your decision down to only two options. If you have, you’re in luck, because this is one of the easiest biases to counter.
Simply add a third option.
What does that look like? If you’ve already eliminated a third (or fourth or fifth) choice, temporarily add it back into the equation. Say your team at work is hiring someone. Put one of the candidates that you’ve eliminated back into the mix. What did that person not demonstrate for you that meant you decided not to hire? Do your other two candidates have those skills or qualities your third candidate was missing? Which of them has more?
If you didn’t have a third candidate that was viable, add in your ideal candidate instead. What skills would your dream hire possess, how would that person have answered questions in the interview, and what traits would be evident in the selection process?
You may discover that one of your top two candidates stands out now as the best choice. Or you may discover that you need to rewrite the job description and start over entirely. But better that than to regret the hire. Whether you’re adding a realistic third option or an ideal third option, you now have the information you need to make a more strategic decision.
This process becomes even more important if you’re deciding whether or not to take an action at all. Let’s say you’re trying to choose whether or not to book a trip. Please remember that our brains often answer an easier question than the one we’ve asked it, and too often we don’t even notice the substitution.
“Should I book this trip?” is a complex question, requiring our brains to consider the cost, the timing, the location, if we can get time off work, and so forth. A much simpler question is, “Do you want a vacation?” and our brains will answer with, “Of course you want a vacation, book the trip!” That’s not what we asked.
Or maybe our brains will substitute the question, “Can you afford this trip?” If the answer is no, you may find yourself avoiding all travel when you really need a vacation.
So add in a third option—a different month, a different location, different travel companions, and then see what you think. You may realize you want a vacation, but not this particular trip. Or that you’re going to start saving up for this particular trip. Or even that you just want to stay home.
Adding the third option doesn’t confuse the issue, it actually clarifies it.
Break the binary and make better decisions.
This blog post was written by Amie Pilla, without the assistance of AI.
Copyright Amie Pilla, 2024, All Rights Reserved
Opmerkingen