The constant change around us and the myriad of possibilities means we naturally refer more to the conclusions of experts instead of focusing on what really matters. This phenomenon is very well described in Think for Yourself, by Harvard University lecturer Vikram Mansharamani, who warns that by outsourcing thinking, we intentionally let others take control of our field of vision. The author claims that, on the contrary, we should ideally expand our awareness of other variables that may be worth considering. You thus form your own critical thinking.
If we limit ourselves by our number of information sources, we also restrict our possibilities. We filter information and with it the reliability of our decisions. Mansharamani suggests that if our decision-making frameworks are set by others, we are vulnerable to unnecessary risks and missed opportunities, plus unfounded fears and prospects. Each expert focuses on their own specialisation and can easily lose a broader perspective that has a significant impact on the issue. It is therefore crucial to maintain a distance.
Our focus can confuse us
Attention focus is the process of filtering and ignoring certain information. It increases certainty and conviction, and suppresses mere judgments.
The so-called Peter Principle basically revolves around our attention. In practice, this is the principle according to which employees are promoted on the basis of past performance and merit. Paradoxically, however, there is no relationship between the quality of performance of an employee in a lower position and an ability to meet often completely different requirements associated with a managerial function.
It's about how managers focus too much on how a person is doing in their current job: this provides a means for them to evaluate the potential for further employment but it doesn't make sense. Evaluation criteria should be based on future roles. This could mean some people who perform poorly in their current position may excel after promotion.
By focusing intensively on one factor, we often overlook the consequences of our actions. This might give rise to the very problem we are trying to avoid. You need to take a step back and look at the whole system rather than just parts of it.
Although we are all to some extent dependent on others, this dependence should not result in blind obedience. When turning to people who can help, we must be aware of their limitations and appreciate other perspectives as well.
We need to take the time to gather other perspectives and triangulate unique views. Every perspective is inherently incomplete: each one of them has its own limitations but together they provide an expanded context of thinking. And especially in uncertain times, it is essential to have a broader context than your own personal perspective.
Experts are among the least successful predictors in times of enormous uncertainty. They often think they know more than they really do, so they radiate a sense of credibility which they cannot guarantee; rather, experts are good navigators where there is a clear cause-and-effect relationship.
In conclusion, one of Mansharamani's recommendations from the book is appropriate: we need to come up with a new way to involve experts in our thinking and perception of reality. But first we must abandon our deep devotion to their claims and refocus on a broader perspective. The future belongs to those who will think for themselves.
-bb-