A Misinformed Gut Decision
A crucial decision was before me. The stakes were high. A poor decision would affect the lives of others, not just me. The pressure was on. But everything happened so fast that I did not even realize the pressure was on. In fact, I didn’t have time to think about what would happen if I did not make a decision and act quickly. The reality was I did not even have time to “think.” And this is a good thing. For if I had spent precious time deliberately thinking and weighing the pros and cons of whether I should slam on the breaks or not, I would have hit the stopped car in front of me.
In his book Thinking Fast and Slow, Dr. Daniel Kahneman would identify this as System 1 thinking. This form of thinking is automatic and fast. This is your brain making decisions without intentional, slow thinking. System 2 thinking, on the other hand, “allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it, including complex computations.”[1] System 2, though slow and deliberate, is not as easily given over to false patterns of thinking that are assumed in the quick decision-making of System 1. Both systems are needed. And Kahneman expounds upon how these systems work and how they influence each other. When we are cognizant of these two systems, we are better equipped to question our own faulty system one thinking that utilizes judgments that may not be accurate, as well as know when certain situations require System 1 over System 2 – though, admittedly, by the time we ask ourselves if a situation requires System 1 or System 2 thinking, it may already be too late. If I had spent precious time on that mental exercise, a great fender bender would have ensued.
System 1 is useful when there is an immediate threat. People rely on their leaders to make decisions. But most decisions are not related to immediate threats. Certainly, some decisions are more urgent. But a leader usually has a moment, however brief, to lean into System 2, ponder, and, ideally, make a rational decision. When a wild bear strolls into the office, however, System 1 needs to kick in and respond.
But what if System 1’s immediate judgments are wrong? A few years ago, my wife Laura and I were on a hike in Sequoia National Park. As we were walking, some hikers a few hundred yards out yelled to get our attention. “Bear!” We looked up. Strolling towards us was a black bear. System 1 kicked in. My natural response? I motioned for Laura to move behind me. System 1 demanded I be the barrier between my wife and the bear.
Brave? Yes. Misinformed? Oh yes. I was shocked when in response to my bravery and selflessness, Laura didn’t move. She was not frozen in fear. Rather, her System 1, which was shaped by information she absorbed earlier via her System 2, responded differently. She knew that the right decision in that moment: look tall and don’t hide.
Fortunately for us, the bear appeared to have had one too many drinks. It lethargically strolled past us, without any hint of hurry, and crawled on a large fallen tree for a nap. If the bear was aggressive, I am grateful Laura’s System 1 response vetoed mine.
Kahneman writes, “The way to block errors that originate in System 1 is simple in principle: recognize the signs that you are in a cognitive minefield, slow down, and ask for reinforcement from System 2.”[2] Life is full of decisions. Some require immediate response, and others require slow, deliberate contemplation. Some are life or death, while others are not. Great leaders are those who are aware of their own biases and potentially misinformed mental patterns. In our journey of leading people, we must be willing to face our misjudgments, receive more accurate information, and allow our System 1 “thinking” to be shaped by the more rational information we receive. We will need to make quick decisions from our emotions and intuition. To assume we will never have to rely on System 1 for decision-making is wishful thinking. But we must be honest with where our intuitive decision-making is faulty and do what we can ahead of time to improve our intuitive decisions.
[1] Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, 1st pbk. ed (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013), 21.
[2] Ibid. 417.
About the Author
David Beavis
David is Australian by birth, was raised in Southern California, and is the Youth and Young Adults Pastor at B4 Church in Beaverton, Oregon. David and his wife, Laura, live in Hillsboro with their dog, Coava (named after their favorite coffee shop). M.A. Theology - Talbot School of Theology B.A. Psychology - Vanguard University of Southern California5 responses to “A Misinformed Gut Decision”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
David,
I appreciate your bear story! What a great way to illustrate the different process of thinking and decision making. I know that with black bears you want to be large and tall, with a grizzly bear you want to not challenge them and the opposite response is needed… I can think of so many decisions that I have faced that I processed in the opposite direction that I wouldn’t let my instinctual thinking play out, I didn’t trust myself, I froze and demanded time for my system 2 thinking… This meant that a needed decision never happened. What would be your take on this when it happens to leaders. When we take too long to make a decision and we miss the moment that needed us?
Hi Sara,
I guess when it comes to leaders being required to make snap decisions with great consequences, I have no easy answer. Something I have wondered is if this is where wisdom accumulated over the years comes in handy. When a leader is faced with a tough decision and has little time for thought, one can only hope that their system 1 has been shaped by wisdom over the years through thoughtful reflection via system 2. We, as Americans, deeply value youth and elevate the young, successful leader who gained early success. But in my reading of early church leadership, bishops could not be younger than 50 years old. Are there short comings to this? Yes. But, there may be merit to leaders being shaped by wisdom over the years so that when tough decisions arise, their system 1, though still faulty, may operate with more wisdom.
David,
The story about the bear sighting is a good one. Rapid firing thinking was taking place. I am sure you were wondering why your wife was not doing what you asked of her. Upon further reflection and hearing from her…you were able to see why she made the choice she made. You had a different evaluation after system 2 thinking took place.
I like how your story shines light on the importance of being careful in our evaluation of others thinking. I know I need to slow down and take into consideration where others are coming from and empathizing with how they are making choices. I think a lot of misunderstandings will be avoided if we heed the following quote:
“The way to block errors that originate in System 1 is simple in principle: recognize the signs that you are in a cognitive minefield, slow down, and ask for reinforcement from System 2”.
(Becca cites this quote as well)
BTW…I am glad you encountered a lethargic bear who was looking for a place to take a nap!!
I loved this post. I actually youtube’d bear defense strategies because I was so curious about just standing being calm.
I think you really nailed it with the honesty factor in regard to intuitive thinking. Honest is such a good description because our natural laziness, habits, goals, motives, etc, can get in the way. I think it’s really important to be aware and honest about our thinking and remove emotion (especially in finances) and it will lead to wise decisions.
Awesome post. Great veto by Laura. Always a interesting read!
One time, when Anya and I were hiking in Taiwan, a snake passed in front of me and I have to say your and my system 1 responses were very different. I quickly jumped behind Anya and held her between the snake and me.
I appreciate your call for us as leaders to be willing to face our misjudgments. Unfortunately, I think leadership often comes with a lack of humility, but leadership without humility is bad leadership.