It starts with action.
It’s difficult to shake the idea that we think before we act, because if we admit that action sometimes precedes thinking, we seem less rational. So we buy a car after some thought and preparation, but our real motivation in the moment of decision is unclear: perhaps it’s the salesman’s soothing tone of voice, perhaps it’s the colour, perhaps it’s a mere whim. It’s what happens next that is interesting.
According to Leon Festinger’s theory of Cognitive Dissonance, we experience discomfort when we have to choose between attitudes that are contradictory, and we try to resolve the contradiction somehow. In the case of our car purchase, the idea that we may have been seduced by the salesman conflicts with our idea of ourselves as a smart person. So we try to resolve the conflict; we could get rid of the car, but it’s easier to change our minds and tell ourselves that the salesman was, after all, talking about the ABS braking system, and braking is, after all, very important. Instead of facing up to reality, we mould it to fit our actions.
Then there’s Chris Argyris. He argues that organizations need to face up to hard questions that are raised by events, to undertake “double-loop learning” and dig deeper to find underlying causes, even if these are uncomfortable. But if dissonance reduction is the order of the day, it’s very hard to apply the brakes, reflect and see that we don’t always match up to our own standards – or those of our boss. So we keep hurtling down the highway of life, never stopping to see where this road is going.
The key to double-loop learning is abstraction: reflecting on the experience and pulling away from the it to see what learning it has to offer for future experiences.
Learning to stop and reflect is a lifelong discipline. It is certainly difficult, but with discipline and constancy, it is possible. Here are a few ways of building in reflection:
o Create a space and time each week for reflection – a period for writing, reading and thinking;
o Keep a regular diary or write a reflective letter to someone close to you;
o Build in a reflective component to each completed project, such as a peer review, an honest debrief, or a project journal;
o Make a habit of reading thought-provoking books and journals;
o Develop a special relationship with a trusted friend for honest, private feedback.
Think of life not as a highway, but a winding mountain road in fog. It’s scary to look back at where you almost drove off the cliff, but scarier still to go forward without stopping. Brake early, and often.
May 8, 2010 at 5:34 pm |
Hi David, great post.
I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the ‘emotion’ that often surrounds the situations or events that precede Festingers ‘dissonance’ or would benefit from Argyris’ double loop learning.
Better to acknowledge and accept that emotion, perhaps using it to enhance the learning or try to ‘shelve’ it and cooly reflect in the abstraction process? Or perhaps a healthy balance of both…
May 12, 2010 at 1:15 pm |
Hi Tim – thanks for the comment! I think emotions are critical here: cognitive dissonance is discomfort resulting from being confronted with two irreconcilable notions. This wouldn’t be a problem if we weren’t emotionally attached to at least one of them: there are all sorts of situations in which we encounter conflicting perspectives, but because we don’t have an emotional attachment to them, we either explore the reason for the difference, laugh it off, or choose not to pursue it. We buy things on a whim occasionally, even though we consider ourselves “rational”.
So the question then is: how can we become UNattached? Are there strategies to avoid the effects of cognitive dissonance by becoming less emotionally involved? On the other hand, by trying to take the emotion out of decision making, we become less effective decision makers: check out the book Descartes’ Error by Antonio Damasio for some of the research on the role of emotion in decisions.
I think the strategy of acknowledging and accepting the emotion is a good first step. By acknowledging it, you can detach from it: you can acknowledge that you are pissed off, but you don’t have to act out of anger. You can postpone action: that’s the “shelving” part, but because emotions are intertwined in decision making I don’t know if “cool reflection” really happens, or even should happen.
At times like this, I think it’s important to (i) understand the source of the emotion: why am I pissed off? (ii) check in with a trusted observer (such as a colleague or life partner). The point where double-loop learning comes in is that you may not like what you find out. You may be pissed off for petty, venal reasons: but you are better off knowing this than not knowing it. And as you do this regularly, you learn more about yourself and it becomes automatic; and double-loop learning becomes part of your routine.