![]() When you leave those decisions for the future, you leave yourself a lot of room to rationalize and move the goalposts. Technique #3: Set measurable goals for evaluation ahead of time and have a simple plan on what you will do if the goal is not met.Īnother useful tool is to think ahead of time about how you will decide whether a program is working, if it’s needs to be reevaluated, and how you might pivot. That is a valuable separation to be able to make because it’s toxic for the epistemic health of a group if people feel like they must come to a particular conclusion. So, you can still be a committed team player, while disagreeing with a particular decision. But once it’s time to move forward with a decision, the people who don’t agree can just say, “I still disagree, but now that we’re going forward, I’m committed to trying my best to make this plan work, and I hope that I’m wrong.”ĭisagree and commit separates being a good team player-being committed to the success of the team or the success of a strategy-from what you’re allowed to believe. Ideally, as you have a productive debate, you may end up agreeing based on the evidence, but often you won’t because people have different perspectives, and the evidence is often incomplete. So, how to disagree and commit? First, remember that when you’re debating an idea or decision, disagreement is good and encouraged. To feel like you have to agree with everyone else squelches healthy disagreement. The idea here is that there’s a strong sense people have that, in order to be a team player, they have to agree with each other. At the very least, having a moment to even form your opinion before anchoring on other people’s is very helpful. You could take it even further and have people write down their answers and then put them all in the center before anyone gets to talk. They can form an opinion, independently of hearing what the group consensus is. You can avoid that by having everyone think about their answer before anyone speaks. In group disagreements, one thing that I find helpful is to avoid the failure mode that people often get into where one person comes out with a proposal, and everyone anchors on it. Technique #1: Before anyone speaks, everyone should take a moment to think about their answer. Q: What are concrete ways we can practice the Scout Mindset as teams and use it to make better decisions? Anytime those emotional or social incentives toward a particular conclusion are present, you’re going to see the Soldier Mindset surface a lot more-even if, in the long run, you would be better off in Scout Mindset where you are seeing things accurately and fixing whatever problems are there. It tends to emerge when there’s some alternate incentive-like an emotional or social incentive-to get a particular answer, regardless of the evidence. ![]() Soldier Mindset comes much more naturally in times when there’s no immediate benefit. For example, what is wrong with my car and how do I fix it? Galef: The Scout Mindset comes most naturally to us in situations where we see some direct, tangible benefit to figuring out the truth about the question. Q: What pushes us to be in either the Scout or Soldier Mindset? So, Scout Mindset is basically trying to be objective and intellectually honest and just curious about what’s true. You are always open to revising your map as you learn more and look at the landscape from different perspectives. Your goal, like a scout, is to go out and see what’s actually there-as clearly and objectively as possible-and to form as accurate a map of a situation or an issue as you can, including any areas of uncertainty. In Scout Mindset, your goal is not to attack or defend any particular position. Soldier Mindset is a motivation to defend a preexisting belief or to defend something that you want to believe against any evidence that might threaten to undermine it. Galef: These are metaphors for two very different motivations that can shape our thinking. Q: What are the Scout and Soldier Mindsets? See below for interview highlights, as well as the full recording of my conversation with Julia. And not just any mindset, but one that approaches the environment with curiosity rather than defensiveness.Īuthor Julia Galef calls it “the scout mindset,” and she joined SPN’s Divergent Thinking Show to discuss insights from her book, The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t, and how they can empower state-based organizations to make better team decisions, craft more effective strategies, and achieve greater impact. By Todd Davidson, State Policy Network’s Senior Director of Strategic Developmentįor individual leaders and teams alike, success involves a critical element: mindset.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |