Critical Thinking | Emotional Intelligence in Action

Attention Training: The Fundamental Pillar of Success?

by Michael Nicholas | 20 Oct 2020 | Biases, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Emotional Intelligence, Leadership, Meditation, Mindfulness, Perception, Psychology

“Understanding and managing attention is now the single most important determinant of business success.” ~ Tom Davenport, former director of Accenture Institute of Strategic Change

My childhood home had a steep driveway, sloping up to the road. Dad wanted to leave to go on a cycling trip, but it was very icy that day and he couldn’t get traction to move backward up the drive. Thankfully, there was an easy solution: to roll forward into the garage so that he could get up some momentum before hitting the ice. The problem was, he had already attached his bike to the roof of the car so that he could drive to the start point. As soon as he rolled the car forward, it hit the wall above the garage and the bike was ripped from its mountings.

How could we both have failed to see something so obvious? I was standing right next to the car, and could clearly see that the top of the bike was much higher than the garage door, yet still missed it.

This is a great example of the problem called inattention blindness. If you’ve ever seen the popular “invisible gorilla” video, you’ll know what I’m talking about. Originally created as part of an experiment conducted at Harvard University, it is of two teams of basketball players. Viewers are invited to count the number of passes made by one of the teams, unaware that, in the middle of all the activity, a person in a gorilla suit will walk through the group. Despite how obvious the gorilla is to anyone who already knows about it, scientists have discovered that most people miss the gorilla the first time they watch it, and in other, similar experiments this number can be as high as 80 percent.

Interestingly, without the task of counting the passes, pretty much everyone watching the video will see the gorilla, and this gives us the clue to what happened with my Dad’s bike. Focusing on the task of counting passes causes most of us to miss what would otherwise be obvious, and similarly, it was the fact that our attention was overly focused on the problem of the ice that led us to fail to consider the broader consequences of our solution. When focusing on one task, it can be hard to notice much else.

These examples are highly representative of life. There are always multiple objects or streams of thought that we could concentrate on, and if we become locked onto any one of them it will dominate our attention, leading to us becoming unaware of other things around us.

The solution needed, which is core to all such problems, is the ability to manage attention more effectively. Today, this capability is commonly referred to as “mindfulness”. This is a mental state where the contents of the mind are very stable, enabling us to pay attention in a deliberate way, able to choose and maintain our focus, rather than having it pulled around by distractions.

In the examples above, the core problem is driven by the inappropriate focus of attention, which then blocks awareness to such an extent that even critical, and obvious, information outside the area of attention gets completely missed. This article discusses one of the most effective and accessible approaches to developing attention – meditation – describing how it enables us to change the way the brain perceives the world, thus creating a shift in awareness. It also covers some of the other, many benefits that we can gain from this practice.

Read the Article: How Meditation Works in Your Brain – The connection between attention, awareness, and emotion

My Advice

Despite its historical links to religion, there’s nothing mystical or weird about meditation. Whatever form it takes, meditation is brain training, pure and simple. Amongst other things, it enables us to develop the mental skill of being able to focus attention with intention, which is a skill which has many modern-world benefits.

While the article is largely about attention, I want to reinforce the importance of intention in the process. This is because so much of what we do, and experience, is driven by the subconscious mind according to deeply buried rules. Even our perception of ‘out there’ is a construction which gives us the impression that we are able to see a full rich picture of “reality”. However, because the processes by which this happens are so effortless and unconscious, anything we miss will be completely invisible. To change this, we must introduce the power of intention.

An example of how powerful intention can be is observable when people listen to music. Research has shown that if they do so with an intention to feel happier, they actually become happier, whilst if they only seek to relax their happiness levels don’t move. It is the intention to become happier that makes the difference, which is achieved by consciously directing attention towards the desired outcome.

Thus, intention gives us the ability to bring conscious choice to the act of placing attention. As we develop the capacity to interrupt the automatic, unconscious processes, though mindfulness, we can literally change the way we perceive things and reduce problems like inattention blindness. Meditation enables us to develop this mental capacity. It takes time and deliberate effort; however, like going to the gym, if you are willing to put in the work, the benefits can be assured.

The Best Way to Decide: Fast or Slow?

by Michael Nicholas | 20 Oct 2020 | Creativity, Critical Thinking, Decision Making, Leadership, Mindset, Uncertainty

There can be few things more important to leaders than their professional judgment. As Jim Collins clearly demonstrated in his best-selling book, Good to Great, leaders have the power to build spectacular success stories or drag their companies into decline. Which way they go is largely determined by the quality of their decisions.

The challenge for leaders at all levels, is that making decisions, whether relating to strategy, operational crises or people, cannot reliably be boiled down to the ‘science’ of pure reasoning in a process that will provide all the answers. In this rapidly changing and highly complex world, judgement calls are often riddled with far too many intangibles, complexities, unknowns and variables to allow every option to be identified, fully analysed and understood.

Because it is unclear to many people how this uncertainty impacts decisions, opinions as to what constitutes the best decision-making approach are often divided into two camps: the first believing that slow decision-making driven by clear, structured processes is most effective, whilst the other preferring to trust in speed and accuracy of their intuition. Essentially, it’s a question of slow vs. fast. Even those that attempt to use a combination of the two approaches rarely know which to apply in a certain set of circumstances, ultimately allowing their intuition to decide!

This article examines this hidden dilemma, exploring how different combinations of confidence and speed of decision-making impact leaders’ ability to make effective choices. The answer might surprise you…

Read the Article: Slow Deciders Make Better Strategists

My Advice

I have written previously about the dangerous overconfidence that arises from the belief that “I know” which is highlighted by the article Leading When Uncertainty is Pervasive. The evidence is clear cut that, once we lose our willingness to consider alternative ideas and perspectives, the quality of our decision making, particularly when facing uncertainty, will be badly affected.

This idea points to another dimension that can be overlayed on the analysis presented in this article, to help you to find a better balance between rational and intuitive approaches. This is the level of complexity, ambiguity and pace of change of the environment.

When complexity is low, there will tend be a relatively clear cause-effect relationship between actions and outcomes. This allows a slow, logical, “problem-solving” type of approach to work well, as long as we guard against falling into the “conventional wisdom” trap, assuming that just because a strategy has worked before, it will continue to do so!

At the other end of the spectrum, where uncertainty and pace of change are high, the many variables and potential outcomes make rational analysis much less effective, with the potential to introduce huge errors. Here, intuition and creativity become much more important, because they provide the means of identifying solutions to unknown and previously unexperienced situations. However, keep in mind that this makes it impossible to “know” what the outcome will be, and to plan accordingly.

The Germ Vs. The Terrain, Part 2: Time for a Change of Model?

by Michael Nicholas | 9 Jul 2020 | Critical Thinking, Health, Michael Nicholas

In Part 1 of this article, we looked at the process of scientific revolution, and I described how the world came to accept what has now become the central pillar of Western medicine – “germ theory”. We looked at:

How difficult it can be for scientists, explorers, or leaders, to challenge the accepted understanding and recognise the implications of new data.
How germ theory – the idea that disease is caused by harmful, microscopic organisms – transformed the practice of medicine.
An alternative model to germ theory, known as “terrain” or the “cellular” theory of disease, which emerged at around the same time. This suggests that the internal environment within each person’s body mainly determines their susceptibility to disease.

I find it fascinating that Pasteur, one of the leading advocates of germ theory, who succeeded in changing scientific thinking once, was ignored when, on his deathbed, he declared that, “the microbe is nothing, the terrain is everything”. Should we have listened to him for a little longer?

Resistance to new thinking is often very strong, which is why revolutions – where new ideas are ridiculed and censored – have been so commonplace as scientific understanding has evolved. This is a critically important point, not only for scientists but also for all leaders, because over-reliance on “conventional wisdom” and best practice is becoming a greater and greater risk as the pace of change in the world increases.

Let’s think about some questions which might suggest that the body’s environment, not germs, holds the key to health:

It is estimated that we have 60 trillion bacteria in our bodies all of the time. On top of that, there are an estimated 380 trillion viruses. Many of these microbes have the potential to cause disease. So why is it that most of us, most of the time, seem unaffected?
Why, for example, does the same flu virus, in the same flu season, affect only a small percentage of the population?
Why is stress so strongly linked to the development of disease?
If disease is caused by germs, which result in the body breaking down, what difference could placebos possibly make (yet they have been proven to have a huge impact!)?
Why is it that small exposures to germs often make our bodies more resistant to disease?
Why have well over 99% of all of the people who have sadly died of Covid-19 been either old or suffering from at least one (usually around three) other illness? Why has this virus affected so few people below the age of 65?

Germ theory offers little explanation in response to any of these questions. Not so, terrain theory. Its core principle is that a diseased, toxic, or otherwise unhealthy body, when subjected to disease-causing germs, may struggle to defend itself, whereas a healthy body would be much more able to repel them or limit their impact. If this theory is valid, all of the observations highlighted by the questions above become easy to understand…

As science has evolved, many examples have been discovered to provide evidence in support of terrain theory. One is the power of vitamin D to transform our health, as covered in a previous article, where the study I referenced concluding that avoiding the sun increases risk of death as much as smoking. The reason for this powerful effect is that vitamin D regulates many functions in the body (the terrain), including hormone balance, metabolism, blood pressure, bone density, fighting cancer, and immune function, so low levels of it can be hugely detrimental. Another example is the link between gut health and the effectiveness of the immune system. As this has been recognised, it has enabled us to realise the great importance of maintaining our microbiome, if we want to be healthy.

Moving from an emphasis on germs, to thinking about terrain, shifts the focus for maintaining health away from reactively dealing with illness through the treatment of symptoms, to proactive management of the conditions in our body and the strength of our immune system. It places importance on creating a healthy body through detoxification, nutrition, and lifestyle, optimising our microbiome and internal environment to prevent disease and improve recovery.

Despite the lack of widespread acceptance of terrain theory, scientific research in the area is highly advanced. At the leading edge of this field study is a specialism called epigenetics, which looks at how environment can change genetic expression. I’ll delve into this area in another newsletter, soon.

For those interested in learning more about terrain theory, and how we might benefit from it, I’m offering two articles this time. The first presents a counterargument to germ theory, building the case for why Bechamp’s terrain theory should have won the day.

Read the Article: Louis Pasteur vs. Antoine Bechamp: Know the True Causes of Disease

This second article provides further evidence of the extensive benefits of ensuring that we maintain adequate vitamin D levels. Contrary to its name, vitamin D is actually not a vitamin, but a hormone, and it contributes to health in many ways. This article looks specifically at how vitamin D might aid the prevention and treatment of viral infections, including Covid-19. For example, this chart, taken from one of the studies referenced in the article, shows that almost everyone with vitamin D levels above 30 mg/ml gets only mild symptoms if they contract the disease.

Read the Article: Vitamin D in the Prevention of COVID-19

How Our Personal Stake Can Cloud Judgment

by Michael Nicholas | 10 Jun 2020 | Agility, Biases, Critical Thinking, Decision Making, Emotional Intelligence, Mindfulness

If there is one factor that has defined the challenge leaders have faced in the last few unprecedented weeks and months, it must be uncertainty. In times like this, being able to change course and maintain our adaptability is absolutely vital, particularly as we seek to make critical business decisions. In this kind of environment, there is a cognitive bias that has particular potential to wreak havoc: sunk cost bias, also known as the sunk cost trap or escalation of commitment.

Sunk cost bias, the tendency to continue investing in a losing proposition because of what it’s already cost us, has been responsible for the failure of countless relationships, projects, and even businesses. If you’ve ever bid more than you planned on eBay, held onto a financial investment for too long, sat through a dreadful movie right to the end, eaten far too much in order to finish a meal you bought, or continued to wear an uncomfortable pair of shoes to “get your money’s worth”, you’ve most likely been caught by this mental trap.

The problem is caused by a (probably unconscious) desire to avoid losing the value of an earlier investment of some sort. As such, the sense of loss of the initial investment distorts our ability to properly evaluate the pros and cons of the current situation. There is no need to look any further than the collapse of Barings Bank, which was caused by the desire of a single trader, Nick Leeson, to recapture escalating losses, to see how devastating the impact of this kind of decision-making can be.

Many critical leadership activities involve a series of choices, rather than an isolated decision. They are vulnerable to sunk cost bias because each choice tends to be approached serially, creating a desire to justify previous investments. When this happens, we are highly susceptible to an escalation of our commitment to the original decision and, consequently, likely to become stuck on a failing course of action.

This may not sound complex, but in practice, it can be very difficult to avoid. The solution relies on developing the ability to remove the unconscious biases that lead us to treat initial costs as though they are relevant to new decisions. In reality, these costs are “sunk”, so the goal is to ensure that ongoing decisions consider only the future benefits weighed up against the additional costs, inconvenience, and time involved.

The key, as described in this article, is to implement a set of protective measures and to learn to let go of the past, without becoming overly risk averse. It provides six “rules” that can help, and I particularly like its final recommendation.

Read the Article: How Great Leaders Avoid the Sunk Cost Trap

My Advice

When commitment escalates inappropriately, what is really happening is that our judgment is getting clouded by our personal stake. This stake may be financial, or it could be associated with how we feel our reputation will be impacted by changing course. Either way, it is essential that we find a way to shift our focus of attention away from the previously selected, now irrelevant, course of action to give proper consideration to future costs and benefits. Some simple techniques that can help, in addition to those in the article, include:

Getting views of those who weren’t involved early on.
If you find that admitting an earlier mistake feels distressing, explore to try to identify what is at stake for you personally, and deal with any self-esteem and ego issues that arise.
Avoiding a culture of fear or blame which will tend to encourage staff to perpetuate mistakes.
Determining rewards by looking at the decision process rather than the outcome. This motivates people to make the best decisions at different stages, whether or not their initial decisions have been proven to be correct.
Constantly reassess the rationality of future commitments based on future costs and benefits, attempting to identify failures early. Take an “experimental” approach and be prepared to shift to another course of action at any time.

The Germ vs. The Terrain, Part 1: The Rise of Microbes

by Michael Nicholas | 10 Jun 2020 | Biases, Critical Thinking, Health, Psychology

For the health and wellbeing section this time, I want to cover a subject which also has great relevance to leadership in general, because it looks at core aspects of the advancement in knowledge of all kinds. Due to the amount of information involved, I’ve split the article into two parts, the second of which will be in the next newsletter.

Consider this quote:

“From inhaling the odour of beef, the butcher’s wife obtains her obesity.”
~ Professor H Booth, writing in the Builder, July 1844

Because our thinking has moved on, it sounds ridiculous today. It is obvious that the medical theory on which this idea was based, the Miasma Theory, which held that inhaling bad air was the cause of most, if not all, illness, is complete rubbish. However, that wasn’t always the case, so I’d like to start by looking at how acceptance of this theory impacted the adoption of later, more advanced, ideas.

Imagine, for a moment, if you could go back and walk the streets of London in the mid-1800s. It would have been commonplace to see people carrying a posy of flowers under their noses – at that time, it was considered very sensible to do so, as a means of protecting one’s health!

Imagine using your more advanced knowledge to persuade these people that their flowers were useless, assuring them that you had seen research proving the existence of invisible organisms which are the true cause of disease… It’s easy to envisage the likely reaction, because we’ve all experienced it many times when we challenge others’ deeply held beliefs.

In 1848, Ignatz Semmelweis began this journey. He was the first person to propose the “Germ Theory” of disease, having had an insight that deadly illnesses that were especially prevalent in hospitals might be caused by invisible, infectious agents or germs which were being spread on the hands of doctors and nurses. He gathered evidential proof of his ideas by getting medical staff in his wards to wash their hands in chlorinated lime, showing that this reduced death rates significantly. Nevertheless, his suggestion was widely criticised, ridiculed, or ignored by the “experts” of the day:

Even ten years later, the editor of the Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, the international scientific medical journal, wrote that it was time to stop the nonsense about the chlorine hand wash.
In 1961, his book on the subject was negatively received, and his ideas were again rejected.

Under the pressure of the scrutiny he was subjected to, Semmelweis suffered a breakdown in 1865 and was tricked by colleagues to visit a mental hospital where they locked him up. He died somewhat suspiciously 2 weeks later, supposedly from an infection.

Germ Theory finally became widely accepted over 40 years later, in the 1890s, as a result of the work of the French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur, the English surgeon Joseph Lister, and the German physician Robert Koch. They are now given much of the credit for development and acceptance of this theory, which still dominates today. It is sad to consider how many people died as a result of the refusal of the authorities at that time to take Semmelweis’ ideas seriously.

The commonplace nature of this kind of powerful resistance to new ideas was brilliantly exposed in a book written almost 60 years ago by Thomas Kuhn. Though few have heard of it, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions has sold around 1.5 million copies (a huge number for a book of this nature) and is still considered a classic today. It changed scientific thinking, revealing that progress generally occurs through incremental developments in knowledge, where everyone uses a common framework, interspersed with periods of revolution, or crisis, where paradigms break down and new models of understanding are created. It was in this book that the concept of the “paradigm shift” was birthed.

I’m fascinated by these ideas because, from the perspective of mental development, there is an enormous difference between working within a model to advance it incrementally and having the open-minded creativity to leapfrog to a higher-level model which more accurately represents behaviours in the physical world. Working within the model can be valuable, however, being able to break the mold completely is where the potential for a transformation in results becomes possible.

Ironically, even before germ theory had reached general acceptance, it was already being challenged. The alternative idea, known as “Terrain Theory” (or the cellular theory), stated that the environment is more important than the germ, meaning that the quality of the internal environment mainly determines a person’s susceptibility to disease, not the germs they encounter. It suggests that when the terrain is healthy, the body can handle pathogenic microorganisms without succumbing to illness.

Terrain Theory was put forward by a French scientist, Claude Bernard, and later built upon by Antoine Béchamp. Like Semmelweis before him, Béchamp was branded a heretic, and Pasteur argued with him for years on the subject. However, Pasteur famously changed his mind on his deathbed, acknowledging that, “Le microbe n’est rien, le terrain est tout.” (The microbe is nothing, the terrain is everything).

While germ theory won the debate at the time, and has formed the core of Western medical thinking, the evidence is building powerfully to suggest that Pasteur’s deathbed utterance was correct. As a result, it could be that a paradigm shift towards the terrain theory might, finally, be approaching.

In the next newsletter, I’ll explore terrain theory in more detail, to see how this shift of mindset and belief systems holds the potential to transform our understanding of how to be healthy.

Should you wish to do so, you can read more on Kuhn, and the core principles in his book, in this article:

Thomas Kuhn: the man who changed the way the world looked at science

“Because the Answers Have Changed”

by Michael Nicholas | 27 May 2020 | Agility, Biases, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Decision Making, Leadership, Michael Nicholas, Mindset, Perception, Psychology, Uncertainty

The title of this section is probably one of Einstein’s less well-known quotes. Nevertheless, I believe it’s also one of the most powerful and important things he said, particularly because of the way it relates to our ability to learn, grow and handle change.

The story goes that, while administering a 2nd year exam at Princeton University, his teaching assistant noted that Einstein had set the same paper as the previous year. Dr. Einstein, he asked, “Isn’t this the same exam you gave this class last year?”

Einstein paused, then replied, “Yes, it is.”

Puzzled, the assistant enquired, “Why would you give the same exam two years in a row?”

“Because,” Einstein replied, “the answers have changed”.

This observation highlights a critically important concept: what we hold as “true” now can, and very often will, change. For leaders, there are two sides of this coin, one relating to maximising future potential, and the other to do with over-relying on the past:

It is essential to be able to recognise new insights and discoveries as they emerge, because this awareness can open up new possibilities, creating the potential to gain a competitive advantage or improve results.
Changes in the external environment can have the effect of making any current solution less effective, or even invalid, irrespective of its usefulness in the past. Strategies, systems and processes that were once “best practice” can become past practice virtually overnight, and this is happening right now, at a rate that has never been seen before.

Most people have already become fairly well aware of this challenge. However, understanding the need to remain alert in order to spot changes as they occur is the easy part. Being able to put that awareness into practice is a completely different matter, because of the way our unconscious mind prefers the familiarity of the known. This can create a feeling that we “know”, or are “right”, even when our certainty has no basis in reality whatsoever.

Unfortunately, we get no mental or emotional “warning bell” as we pass the point where ‘knowing” turns from strength to weakness: when we are wrong, but feel certain we are right, the way we feel matches the belief, not the fact. This article provides six recommendations, with details as to why each can be of great help to overcome our tendency to over-rely on expertise and/or knowledge, these being:

Maximise learning by listening attentively and reading critically.
Cultivate diverse sources of trusted advice who are willing to disagree with you.
Avoid your experience becoming too narrow.
Seek to overcome biases by actively looking for differing perspectives (stay detached).
Keep questioning when options are offered.
Think carefully about the risks during delivery/implementation.

Read the Article: The Elements of Good Judgment

My Advice

To respond more effectively to changes in the business environment, it is essential to remember that even practices that worked very well in the past may not get you to where you want to go tomorrow. The most powerful approach for overcoming the ‘knowing/being right’ trap is also the core principle of scientific thinking: take what you believe and actively seek to disprove it, especially if you feel certain! Doing so will help to protect you against out-dated assumptions and be hugely transformation to your decision-making.

As the Einstein example highlights, to stay in front it is essential to keep questioning your beliefs, because you never know when the answer will change!

« Older Entries