How to Make Winning Decisions

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
Henry L. Mencken

The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them.
Albert Einstein

Introduction

Obstacles are those frightful things you see when you take your eyes off your goal.
Henry Ford

It has been said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. I assume you are reading this because you want different results. Perhaps you make decisions based on the same types of information, discussion and analysis. Perhaps you are wondering when you will see the different results you want.

What follows may be quite different from what you’re used to. Set aside your preconceptions, take your time, and enjoy the ride.

Can you think of a time when someone made inaccurate claims, perhaps out of ignorance, to shift blame, or to win an argument?

Can you think of a time when someone didn’t seem to care about your concerns before making a decision you didn’t like? Perhaps this person listened briefly before interrupting to lecture you, or tell you that you’re wrong, or how you should or shouldn’t feel. Perhaps this person misunderstood your concerns or didn’t want to understand. Perhaps your concerns were dismissed as not important enough to change the decision. Were you expected to just accept that it’s over and there is nothing you can do?

If the above situations seem familiar, is there anything you’d like to change?

I’ve worked with groups of 15-20 maximum-security prisoners consisting of different races, cultures, education levels and economic backgrounds. After learning some fundamental communication, problem-solving and conflict-resolution skills, the groups have respectful, constructive discussions and make unanimous decisions.

People learned to be careful about what they put in their stomachs by considering nutritional value as well as taste or convenience. They can learn to be at least as careful about what they put in their minds by considering facts, reason, and consequences as well as emotional comfort or fear.

If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will take you there.

Any road also works if your destination is "not here". How will I know I’m there if I don’t know where "there" is? Before I jump on a bandwagon, I like to know where it’s going, who’s driving, and how bumpy the ride could be. Before considering potential solutions, I like to have a clear understanding of what I hope to accomplish and how I will know I am done. This helps me choose an appropriate solution and helps me check for possible unintended consequences.

Think about the questions in the introduction and imagine what might change if you get everything you asked for.

If you responded to anything in the negative, such as listing things you don’t want, think of everything in the world that isn’t that. If you tell a child not to hit, does that mean biting or kicking is OK?

If you’re not sure how to express what you want but think you’ll know it if you see it:

• What if you don’t see anything you like?
• What specific observations do you like or not like? Why?
• Could there be lurking unintended consequences?
• How many successful outcomes would you need to see to be confident that the next outcome will also meet your goals?

Feel free to make any needed adjustments. If you’re satisfied with what you’re doing, thanks for stopping by. If not, please keep reading.

Why all these questions?

According to an old adage, a free fish feeds someone for day but fishing lessons feed them for life. We could also say that giving people a solution might satisfy them for a day, or perhaps start an argument lasting much longer. Helping people find their own solutions could satisfy them for life. Accepting a solution provided by someone else might seem comforting, but blindly following may have unpleasant consequences. Once people become invested in a specific solution it is much more difficult for them to see alternatives.

If you start by choosing a destination, you can choose from several possible routes, and are free to change routes along the way. If you chose your destination well, you will probably like where you are. If not, you are free to choose another destination.

Why not just debate a specific proposal?

Consider John Godfrey Saxe’s poem "The Blind Men and the Elephant". We could try to settle the blind men’s dispute with a debate followed by a vote by the audience. Each blind man could make his case, summoning all the eloquence he can muster and supporting his position with the "facts" of his observations. This approach might produce a "winner", but does it determine once and for all what an elephant really looks like? Should textbooks use this description of elephants?

I prefer a system where people clarify shared goals and needs before becoming invested in a particular solution. I benefit by learning from others and by looking for something useful in the positions of others. Taking ideas from various positions may lead to a new option that better meets the goals of everyone. If you are inclined to evaluate one specific proposal at a time, a good place to start is with your own position. What inspires you to reconsider or shift your own position? How well does your current preference meets your own goals and the goals of others who prefer a different option?

Fundamental Principles to Help Get Started

• Learn by experiencing the process.
• Individuals seek, explore, and reconsider with guidance from peers.
• Listen without judging.
• Be open to learning from others who may be different.
• Present your own position firmly but fairly.
• Take the advice you offer others and be a good example.
• Look for the good within yourself and others.

Think back to the opening questions about your own past experiences and what you want to be different next time.

Offering others options such as considering the needs of others before acting, exploring alternatives, or re-considering beliefs that lead to harmful actions may be part of the solution but the person I can influence most is myself. I have a few guidelines that I adjust for each situation.

I will assume that those who disagree know something I don’t

I believe that we know more than me. I will ask questions and be willing to shift my position as my understanding deepens. I will focus on the other person as they express their own motivations, goals, thoughts or emotions. If I notice myself looking for an opportunity to jump in and respond, correct, or criticize, I will recognize that my attention is drifting from the other person to myself.

Being offended, or assigning fault or blame to others, does not automatically make me right. I will offer to explore solutions together in the hope that we can both be right.

I will distinguish between observations and interpretations

If I see someone waving her arms near a toad, before jumping to the conclusion that she’s a witch who just turned someone into a toad, I will remember I only observed that she’s waving her arms and there’s a toad nearby. Perhaps she’s conducting a symphony she composed for the toad. I won’t know for sure until I ask. While pursuing a specific goal, people sometimes make decisions that harm others. I could assume the intention was to harm others, or that this person doesn’t care about others. I could also ask about the problem and offer to help explore ways to achieve the goal without harming others.

I will distinguish between goals and game-plans

People share goals or needs such as food, air, water, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To meet their goals, people might explore various game-plans, or solutions, such as buying food, exercising, or meditating. Spending money is a common game-plan. Before discussing game-plans such as how much money to spend, I like to consider the actual goals and other possible game-plans to meet those goals.

I will look at short-term needs and long-term needs and recognize that different game-plans might apply to each. Long-term goals of a starving village might be met with seeds to grow food. Villagers also need to survive long enough to harvest the first crop, which requires a short-term game-plan other than eating the seeds. Will the short-term game-plan lead naturally to the long-term game-plan or make the long-term game-plan more difficult? How does each possible game-plan bring everyone closer to their goals?

I will speak for myself

Sometimes I have an internal response such as "that’s stupid". Before blurting out something I might later regret, I try to slow down and think about what I hope to accomplish. If others do something that I interpret as stupid, will calling them stupid make them smarter? Are the others likely to thoughtfully consider my insult, decide I’m right, and instantly change? Will finding fault with someone else make me right, or is it possible we’re both wrong? If limited options lead to slow progress and feelings of frustration, I could say that I’m experiencing frustration over the limited options and invite the other person to join me in exploring new options.

Observations, interpretations, goals, and game-plans may all be jumbled together in someone’s mind. What I consider a factual evaluation of an interpretation or game-plan could be heard as an attack on a cherished goal, leading to a defensive response and a higher wall between us. Until I understand and acknowledge the goals of others, comments about interpretations or game-plans may just bounce off, increasing the frustration level in both of us. Recognizing and understanding these concepts in myself makes it easier to recognize and deal with them in others.

Easier Said than Done

We all know how others ought to behave and how others need to change. Taking our own advice is a process and a journey. We won’t always get it right the first time. It’s important to be careful how we point out lapses by others, and hope they do the same for us.

We know more than me.

Groups can find solutions acceptable to everyone in the group. When I’m satisfied with a group decision, I’m more likely to help make it work and more likely to consider the problem solved. If I’m on the losing side of a vote, or I’m limited to choosing between unpleasant options, I may look for ways to keep the controversy alive after the vote is over. Making decisions as a group may take longer but could solve the problem sooner. As with voting, negotiating or debating , some people may choose not to participate. Perhaps they do not have a strong preference, or they are confident that another participant adequately represents their position.

Think back to the opening questions about your own past experiences and what you want to be different next time.

1: Explore the Problem

Listen to everyone’s goals or needs and try to see the problem from each individual’s perspective. If I notice myself wanting to jump in and respond, correct or criticize, I consider that a warning that I’m focusing on myself when this first step is about understanding the needs of others. We could mention short-term needs and long-term needs if they are different. Focus on goals. We look at game-plans later. We could also consider the qualities or characteristics of each person's ideal solution. Are some qualities or characteristics more important than others?

2: Look for Common Goals

Think about which goals or needs everyone shares. This is a chance to release your inner 3-year-old and relentlessly ask "why?" Why do I need ___? So I can do ___. Why do I want to do ___? What will happen if I don’t do ___? If I do ___ then I ___. You may end up with a basic concept such as survival, safety, shelter, liberty, happiness, inner peace, or social interaction.

3: Identify Resources

Make a list potential resources such as money, time, materials, paid staff and volunteers. Stop when you cannot think of anything else for the list. You can add things later. We look at how these resources might be used later.

4: Create a Solution Smorgasbord

List potential game-plans. This is an opportunity to expand our options before making a commitment to a specific game-plan. Look for opportunities to split proposals into smaller pieces and combine the split pieces in various ways.

5: Evaluate Each Potential Game-plan

Allow each person a chance to comment on the possible game-plans. This should be the first time you consider the merits and potential problems of any game-plan. How well does each game-plan meet the stated goals? Look for ways to shorten the list by combining game-plans that have much in common. If people seem committed to contradictory game-plans, take a step back, review the goals, and work backwards from the goal to a suitable game-plan. Keep evaluating until everyone is satisfied.

6: Decide How to Make It Work

Who, what, when, where, how? If people are convinced there is no way to make the chosen solution work, review the previous steps.

Review

Do an occasional check-in to see how the agreement is working and look for unintended consequences. Repeat previous steps as needed to make changes or corrections.

I Believe, Therefore I Am

What we need is not the will to believe but the will to find out.
Bertrand Russell

Loyalty to a petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.
Mark Twain

We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when adults are afraid of the light.
Plato

Many think of their beliefs and opinions as part of who they are, but what about the way they formed those beliefs and opinions? Before we were believers, we were blank slates capable of forming beliefs. The philosopher Descartes went so far as to doubt his very existence. He finally concluded that if he could doubt his existence, think about his doubt, and even doubt that he was thinking about doubt, then he must actually exist. He simplified his conclusion to, "I think, therefore I am." Before thinking about something you believe and how that belief is part of who you are, think about how you came to believe it.

Was there ever a time you believed something different? If so, what changed?

If you believe because someone told you to believe, would you change your mind if the same person now told you to believe the opposite?

If you believe because you "just know" it’s true, what would you say to someone who "just knows" it’s not true? How would you respond if someone says the same thing to you?

If you believe it’s true for you, could it be false for someone else? How could you tell if it’s true for someone you just met? Is there a test for this belief?

If you believe because it’s the only thing you know, how would you respond to someone who knows more than you and believes differently?

If you evaluate various options and try to choose the best one, how do you respond to new information?

When people comment on your clothing, they are probably also thinking about your taste in clothes or the way you choose your clothes. The clothes themselves just hang on your body. The way you choose your clothes reflects your personality. In the same way, why you believe and how you respond to those who believe differently define you even more than what you believe.

On the Shoulders of Giants

If I have seen further, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.
Sir Isaac Newton

Becoming part of the big picture doesn’t make you smaller, it makes the picture bigger.

Many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind than in the one where they sprang up.
Oliver Wendell Holmes

Learn from the mistakes of others - you can’t live long enough to make them all yourself.
Martin Vanbee

We humans are sharers and learners. We add our own thoughts and creations to what we learn from parents, teachers, friends and mentors, and then pass our knowledge along to others. 30 years after the invention of the transistor, several manufacturers offered affordable home computers. The Internet and spam were close behind. The first space shuttle launch was less than eighty years after the Wright Brothers first flight. We cannot all be rocket scientists or invent something as important as transistors, but we can enjoy the benefits and share in the accomplishments by understanding to the best of our ability.

Ideas and understanding evolve too. Thoughts about social hierarchies, entitlements, punishments, and how to treat those who are different have changed much throughout human history.

Anyone can climb onto the shoulders of a giant. Some offer their own contributions and others just enjoy the view, courtesy of those who came before.

Many people honor their heritage by passing on the traditions of their culture or society. You can honor your heritage and also embrace change. Each tradition came from somewhere and took its place alongside earlier traditions. Our ancestors kept traditions because they served some purpose, even if that purpose is simply to remind us of someone or something from our past. As we sit on the giant of our own heritage, that giant can join others on the shoulders of an even larger giant. We can climb ever higher without leaving anything behind.

The Committee’s Camel

A camel is a horse designed by a committee.

Some compromises seem reasonable or innocent but may produce a bad decision (and a stubborn, humpbacked, spitting horse).

• Going along to get along
• Splitting the difference
• Swapping favors
• Voting for one of two choices

Other, less innocent factors may also sneak through.

• Self-interest of an individual, or a represented group
• Ignoring potential consequences
• Overlooking more fundamental issues
• Combining several unrelated issues

After a lengthy discussion about how many eyes and ears a horse needs, some committee members might say, "We went along with you on two eyes and two ears, so now you have to go along with us and give the horse five legs". It should not be a matter of one person going along without question. Ideally, everybody should agree with whatever is most beneficial to the horse, or the horse’s owner. There are valid reasons for giving a horse two ears and two eyes, but much less compelling arguments for a five-legged horse.

How much should a horse eat? Some committee members say five pounds of oats per day, others say eighty. It might seem tempting to split the difference, or vote for one or the other, but how does either choice benefit the horse or the horse’s owner? Some say a horse that only eats five pounds of oats will be cheap to feed. Others say such a horse won’t be strong enough for many jobs, and still others say a horse that eats lots of oats will boost profits for farmers. If the committee really wants to stray from their horse-designing mission and help farmers, there may be better ways that have nothing to do with feeding horses. These are two separate issues that should be discussed separately. More importantly, why even discuss how much a horse should eat? Food is basically an energy source. Once the committee determines how much work to expect from one horse, nutritional requirements should follow easily. Those needing more power can use several horses together. Those who only need the power of one horse should not have to buy excess oats.

Sometimes unavoidable ambiguities make agreement difficult. Carefully considering potential consequences can become important. Some questions to ask are:

• What are the consequences of being wrong?
• Are we giving up something important to gain something else?
• What are likely early warning signs?
• How easily can we respond to those warning signs?
• What sorts of corrections can we make as things develop?
• What safety precautions or intermediate steps could be taken?
• If it turns out we made a bad decision, how easily can we change it?

Members skeptical of the solution might be assigned as lookouts for signs of trouble.

Some committee members might represent a larger group and vote according to their group’s desires. These representatives should present the concerns of their group to the entire committee, and help the committee understand and consider those concerns, but vote in the best interest of the committee’s objective. If the final decision conflicts with the group’s initial desires, the representative can help the group understand why the committee made that decision and how everyone benefits.

Traditional "yes/no", "one-or-the-other" voting works if there are only two reasonable options. If there are more than two options, Ranked Choice Voting is much more flexible.

Let it Begin with Me

Take care when giving advice. It might be given back.

I think I’d better think it out again.
Fagin’s song "Reviewing The Situation" from Oliver

It has been said in many ways:

Let him that would change the world, first change himself!
Socrates (470BC - 399BC)

O would some power the gift to give us to see ourselves as others see us.
Robert Burns (1759 - 1796)

Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.
Leo Tolstoy (1828 - 1910)

You must be the change you wish to see in the world.
Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948)

Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.
Carl Jung (1875 - 1961)

We have met the enemy and he is us.
Pogo/Walt Kelly (1913 - 1973)

Ask not what your country can do for you, do it for yourself.
Stewart Brand (b.1938)

It is about admitting to ourselves that we have much more in common with others than we would like to admit. For many, this is the most difficult part of the process. It may be tempting to think that everything would be fine if those others would stop being so stubborn, admit that they are wrong, and agree to do things my way. Those others may be thinking the same about me. We may settle for splitting the difference, trading concessions, or simply agreeing to disagree. What if, like the blind men and the elephant, we were both wrong from the start? If we are going to break the cycle, someone has to go first.

Many people who have listened to a foreign language may have heard words in the other language that sound like words in English. The foreign words may sound familiar but could have very different meanings and the consequences can vary from humorous to catastrophic. If people have nothing else to go on, it is tempting to jump to conclusions based only on that little bit that seems familiar. We need to remind ourselves to slow down and ask questions before acting on something that may exist only in our imagination.

People often enjoy stumping each other with riddles and brainteasers that may rely on steering people toward a wrong path, dead end, or contradiction. The solution often requires backing up to the wrong turn and taking a different, less obvious path.

Murder mysteries may begin with clues that point to a particular suspect. Other characters may demand this person be immediately arrested and punished. The true culprit is only revealed after a determined detective sees some troubling loose ends and digs deeper. It is easy for readers or observers to simply enjoy the bumps, twists, and turns of a well-told story without becoming emotionally invested in a particular outcome. Situations that impact us directly are more difficult, but it is still important to occasionally take a step back, listen to others, and look for alternate paths that may lead to a different conclusion.

There is a game where people pass a message around a circle by whispering in the ear of the next person. By the time the message gets around the circle, it is often changed. As a message travels from our ears to our conscious mind, it travels through various pathways controlled by our thoughts, feelings, preconceptions, knowledge, past experiences, or associations with other concepts. Some pathways are straight. Others may have twists, bumps, trap doors or dead ends. While traveling through an internal pathway, the message may change, or part of the message may be trapped or erased. As we become aware of these pathways and observe messages passing through, we can learn to straighten out crooked pathways, seek shortcuts, and create new pathways. One way to explore our internal pathways is to observe ourselves thinking. This leads to a better understanding of our own thought process and the various associations we make.

Think back to the opening questions about your own past experiences and what you want to be different next time.

• I accept something as true when ...
• I know I am getting good advice when ...
• I trust people who ...
• I accept the decisions or opinions of others when ...
• When meeting someone new, I think about ...
• As I get to know someone, some changes in me are ...
• Something I would like others to know about me is ...
• Something surprising I learned about someone else is ...
• Some ways I respond differently to different people are ...
• Something I value in others is ...
• I accept the needs of others as equal to my own needs when ...
• When I hear a rumor about someone I don’t like I ...
• When facing 2 unpleasant options I ...
• Conflicting opinions are never/sometimes/always helpful because ...
• When I want someone to change, I ...
• When someone expects me to change, I ...
• I make the best decisions when ...
• I feel good about a decision when ...
• I consider a situation "good enough" when ...
• I reconsider past decisions when ...
• I am confident I found the root of a problem when ...

As we explore our own pathways, we also learn how to listen and ask questions that help us understand the pathways of others. As we learn more about the pathways within ourselves and others, we learn to recognize actual needs, and how to separate those needs from strategies that we believe will help us meet those needs. We can learn to distinguish "feel-good" solutions from "do-good" solutions. We can share what is going inside of us in specific situations and listen to what is going on inside others. If we catch ourselves wanting to jump in or interrupt with our own opinions, we can take that as a warning that we are focused on what is going on inside us rather than carefully listening to what is going on inside someone else.

Many people find it easier to relate to others who are similar in some way. How do you know what you might have in common with someone you just met? If there are obvious differences , could there also be something positive you both share? If you both like music but listen to different kinds of music, you might look deeper and consider:

• When do we listen to music?
• Do we share a reason we like our favorite music?
• How did we first learn about the music we like now?
• How could we help someone else understand why we like this music?
• When we first heard this music, did we like it as much as we like it now?
• What kind of music did we like before and what changed?
• Do we expect to listen only to this kind of music for the rest of our lives?
• Was there an especially meaningful moment in our lives associated with our favorite music?

Unless I am certain that the other person enjoys answering personal questions, I might begin by briefly sharing my own thoughts as an example of the type of response I’m inviting. I try to assure others by my example that I will not ask something I am not willing to discuss about myself. If the other person accepts my invitation to speak, I let them know I am listening by my body language, eye contact, and giving them time to fully express their thoughts. When they finish, I might repeat something I found interesting or meaningful. If I am tempted to interrupt and respond, correct or criticize, I consider that a warning that I am thinking about myself when I should be learning about someone else. As my understanding deepens, my options increase and I may shift my own position in some way.

Being a good example and encouraging others to do the same is a process and a journey. We will not always get it right the first time. It is important to be careful about how we point out lapses by others, and hope they do the same for us.

I did all that and it still doesn’t work!

Am I not destroying my enemies when I make them my friends?

There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.
Robert Evans

Outside of science, facts rarely determine anything. Context determines everything, and it changes.
Connie Rice

The one who frames the issue wins the debate.

Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; an argument an exchange of ignorance.
Robert Quillen

Some discussions are like the horns of a steer. A point here, a point there, and a lot of bull in between.

It is harder to hate up close.

Sometimes, despite patient persistence, agreement eludes the participants. Perhaps someone is blocking a solution just because they can. Perhaps people just don’t want the system to work, or don’t want to go along with the process. Perhaps some like things as they are and do not care that others are left out. Perhaps some hate others more than they want a solution.

Remember this is a journey, not a destination. In many cases, you do not just flip a switch and then everyone lives happily ever after. It is an ongoing process. A participant’s desire for an inclusive solution must be greater than their hate, fear, or greed.

If you are working with people who choose not to cooperate, are there others who might be more receptive or could influence those who choose not to cooperate? What are the consequences for each participant if there is no inclusive solution?

There may be obvious differences, but any two humans likely have much more in common than DNA. When people hate each other more than they want a solution, finding that common humanity is a big step toward resolving differences. It is harder to hate up close. Could there be something positive you can both relate to, such as a happy childhood moment, life-changing events, a mentor, role-model, or important life-lessons?

What inspires you to stick with a discussion? How could you help someone else find similar inspiration?

How long has this problem been festering? What are the consequences of abandoning the search for a solution? Considering the time it took for this problem to develop and the severity of the problem, how much time should be spent seeking a solution?

Review goals, game-plans, observations, and interpretations. If you hear an interpretation, you might ask for a specific observation and consider other possible interpretations of that observation. What are your goals? What are the other person’s goals? If you ask about a goal, and the other person responds with a game-plan, you might ask a follow-up question, such as "why is this important to you?" or "what will happen if you do not do this?" Hopefully the answer will bring you both closer to understanding the actual goal. If you think you understand the actual goal, you could try rephrasing the response, substituting a possible goal for their game-plan. If someone says, "I wish we could ban all those political attack ads!" rather than lecturing them about court decisions or freedom of expression, one possible response is, "It sounds like you are really frustrated by attack ads and want factual information to help you make an informed choice. Is that correct?" This response recognizes the concern about attack ads and transforms the game-plan of banning attack ads into a goal of factual information. Once you both understand each other’s actual goals, is there common ground? If so, you can start exploring game-plans.

How many ways are there to frame this discussion? Is it about how much to spend, individual rights or responsibilities, or who is a victim or oppressor? How could you reframe the discussion to focus on a shared goal such as equal opportunities or cleaning up a mess?

If you are not finding common ground, what might inspire you to change your mind? If there is an alternative, would you want to hear it? What might inspire you to seriously consider this alternative? If an alternative might satisfy everyone concerned, would you be willing to shift your own position? What might inspire others to shift their position?

Is it possible to split the group in a way that allows each smaller group to create their own solution?

What aspects of a solution can you control now? Is that enough to get started? We may have limited control of a situation, but we can always control our own response.

If some participants are completely left out, is there a way they can get by while continuing to work on a more inclusive solution? This is sometimes referred to as BATNA or Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. A BATNA may give you a little of what you want. Are there enough existing advantages or benefits to justify going along with things as they are while exploring your own alternatives? The worst case BATNA is finding a way to get by on your own, or perhaps with like-minded allies, after others refuse to cooperate.