Skip to main content

Chess grandmasters are expert decision makers. They survey the board, often seeing patterns familiar to them from countless games they have played or studied. Their next move will usually be immediately apparent. But they are careful not to pounce on it. They know a dangerous error in thinking is always possible. So they check their thinking before making their next move toward checkmate.

Ted Cadsby, the former executive vice-president of retail distribution at Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and Toronto-based director of several companies, believes that leaders, like grandmasters, have to be alert to the thinking errors they are vulnerable to as they grapple with complex issues.

"Managers have to operate like grandmaster chess players. They use – but don't rely on – gut instinct. They step back and critically analyze the situation. That's necessary because 25 per cent of the time, initial instinct would be wrong. Rushing to conclude is antithetical to good strategic decision making, because our first intuitions can lead us astray," he said in an interview.

Story continues below advertisement

We get into trouble as every complex problem is unique. We may have developed expertise in solving routine problems, but each complex problem has its own special features. The two most likely and pernicious cognitive errors that can derail us flow from our addiction to certainty and our tendency to oversimplify everything.

We feel out of control when we are uncertain, so that pushes us toward embracing false certainty. "We are literally hardwired, physiologically and psychologically, to rush to conclude, because rushing to certainty is both survival-enhancing and a good way to preserve limited mental energy," he said. But it can land us in trouble. To counter this tendency, he recommends:

Be skeptical of initial conclusions: Like a grandmaster, we need to slow down, and rethink the situation. That sounds simple, but in his book, Closing the Mind Gap, he notes it goes against the grain. Education, for example, is based on getting the one right answer quickly, within the time allotted on a test. If we can suspend judgment for a while, we'll usually come to a conclusion as soon as we have considered a reasonable number of alternatives.

Think about conclusions in terms of probabilities: Don't fall into the trap of black-and-white thinking about choices – all good or all bad. Instead, we should ask what is the probability of this course of action being likely? Is it 40 per cent, 60 per cent, or 80 per cent? That forces us to be skeptical. On a practical basis, he usually finds it helpful to think of whether the odds of succeeding or something being true is greater or less than 50 per cent.

Engage others, since groups outperform individuals: We will never have all the information and ideas on our own and must work with others to have a better shot at being right. The difficulty is that we haven't been taught how to nurture or steer productive conversations and such discussions don't happen automatically. Managers have to learn to be adept facilitators of conversation, eliciting dissent and prodding people to address the issues that surface. It's not a matter of diversity of people in the discussion; it's a matter of the diversity of discussion. "This is a new skill set that managers need," he said.

The other major error to guard against is our tendency to simplify our thinking. The problem with simplifying is that it is based on excluding information. For straightforward problems, the information we ignore is irrelevant, but for complex problems, the disregarded information is usually crucial. To sidestep this trap:

Dig for the interconnection between things: We tend to focus on cause and effect in decision making, but often far too simply. Managers must probe the interrelationship between the factors they are studying and how all contribute to cause and effect. "This can require more formality [in decision-making]. But keep in mind that things are more complex than we believe," he said.

Story continues below advertisement

Interact with the problem to generate useful feedback: Feedback about complex problems lurks below the surface, so interaction with the system – your market and organization – is required, experimenting with ideas and learning from the results. Be flexible, adapting quickly as you learn, time and time again if necessary. "Technology firms are good with this. Long-standing industries like retail have to do this – launch solutions that you know are not perfect as you realize you can improve it later," he said.

Pay attention to randomness: When we oversimplify, we misunderstand randomness and how it can be influencing our perception of events or the marketplace. He notes that mutual funds outperforming the market for 15 years might only be benefitting from randomness. "We are inclined to attribute skill where randomness is, in fact, the reason," he said.

As business problems become more ambiguous, we can't rely on intuition or simplistic thinking. We need to critically address the issues, alert to the errors that can force us into checkmate.

Harvey Schachter is a Battersea, Ont.-based writer specializing in management issues. He writes Monday Morning Manager and management book reviews for the print edition of Report on Business and an online work-life column Balance. E-mail Harvey Schachter

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter