How to Have a Good Day: Harness the Power of Behavioral Science to Transform Your Working Life pdfdrive com

ADOPT A CROSS-CHECK ROUTINE
So the upshot is this: to lighten the load on our brains, our automatic system is
almost always trying to keep us from seeing the whole picture. Sometimes that’s
okay, because speed and simplicity are all we need. But when we’re doing
anything where good judgment matters, we need to widen our field of vision.
That means being willing to look for contradictory evidence, see beyond recent
events, and take a second look at apparently obvious choices. And we certainly
want to consider more than one option—even if it means we come back to the
original idea.
But our shortcuts are fast and instinctive—so how can we possibly know what
we don’t know? Some behavioral scientists are pessimistic about our ability to
outthink the automatic system, and I understand that point of view. But in the
workplace I’ve seen one technique that generally succeeds in improving our
average level of wisdom: adopting a go-to cross-check rule that’s simple enough
to become part of your routine anytime you’re doing something important. Here
are five cross-check rules that I’ve seen people deploy effectively: “Don’t
Default,” “Devil’s Advocate,” “Mandate Dissent,” “Never Say Never,” and
“Pre-mortem.”
Don’t Default
If you’re making a decision that has consequences, you always want to pause if

---

you’re faced with just one option—even if it looks appealing. Like this:
Hit the “pause” button and give yourself a moment to think about
alternatives. Ask yourself and others: “If we 
had
to think of other
possibilities, what would they be?”
Look hard at the advantages of the other options, and use what you discover
to test or refine the original proposal. Perhaps the first option is still the right
way forward, but you might see ways to improve it once you’ve forced
yourself to consider other possibilities.
One person that Charles Darwin would probably respect for his efforts to
overcome cognitive shortcuts is Nayan, the chief financial officer of a global
bank. During the day, Nayan makes complex business decisions about the right
way to manage the bank’s finances. At home, he paints Hindu mandalas. His
colleagues have nicknamed him “Yoda,” the epitome of wisdom and calm.
As with most senior managers, many of Nayan’s decisions revolve around
people issues rather than balance sheets. “When I first joined the bank, I was told
that one of my first tasks was to fire someone. The decision about this guy had
been made before I came on board, and I was the new line manager, so it fell to
me.” It would have been easy for Nayan to just accept that default instruction.
After all, he was new, and of course he didn’t want to rock the boat. But despite
hearing some strong language about this person’s behavior—he was apparently
“arrogant”—it wasn’t clear to Nayan what substantive evidence sat behind that
accusation. So he decided to do what he would normally do when making an
important decision: he asked a lot of questions.
First, he acknowledged that the default option—to fire the guy—might still be
the correct one. “But I wanted to map out all the options.” There was obviously
“fire him” and “don’t fire him.” But under the “don’t fire him” option, Nayan
mapped out a few different possibilities. “I think people were seeing this as a ‘do
nothing’ option. But there were lots of potential ways to improve the situation,
like coaching him or moving him to a different role, that didn’t involve him
losing his job.”
Then Nayan gathered more information. “I spoke to a cross-section of his co-
workers, and asked about his good points and bad points.” What did Nayan
discover? “The guy was bright and decisive. Sometimes too decisive. But his
team loved him and he was a great mentor to them.” As a result, Nayan believed

---

it would be worth holding on to him if he was willing to do more to build
bridges and work collaboratively. “The decision that was handed to me was
based on perceptions more than evidence—some of his peers simply didn’t like
his style,” Nayan said. When Nayan approached him, he was mortified to
discover what people thought of him, and grateful to have a chance to put it right
—which he did, within three months.