Search This Blog

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligent people don’t stop believing in themselves. Emotionally intelligent people persevere. They don’t give up in the face of failure, and they don’t give up because they’re tired or uncomfortable. They’re focused on their goals, not on momentary feelings, and that keeps them going even when things are hard. They don’t take failing to mean that they’re a failure. Likewise, they don’t let the opinions of others keep them from chasing their dreams. When someone says, “You’ll never be able to do that,” they regard it as one person’s opinion, which is all it is.

Thursday, January 06, 2022

Ideas About How the World Works

 A list of ideas, in no particular order and from different fields, that help explain how the world works:


Depressive Realism: Depressed people have a more accurate view of the world because they’re more realistic about how risky and fragile life is. The opposite of “blissfully unaware.”

Skill Compensation: People who are exceptionally good at one thing tend to be exceptionally poor at another.

Curse of Knowledge: The inability to communicate your ideas because you wrongly assume others have the necessary background to understand what you’re talking about.

Base Rates: The success rate of everyone who’s done what you’re about to try.

Base-Rate Neglect: Assuming the success rate of everyone who’s done what you’re about to try doesn’t apply to you, caused by overestimating the extent to which you do things differently than everyone else.

Compassion Fade: People have more compassion for small groups of victims than larger groups, because the smaller the group the easier it is to identify individual victims.

System Justification Theory: Inefficient systems will be defended and maintained if they serve the needs of people who benefit from them – individual incentives can sustain systemic stupidity.

Three Men Make a Tiger: People will believe anything if enough people tell them it’s true. It comes from a Chinese proverb that if one person tells you there’s a tiger roaming around your neighborhood, you can assume they’re lying. If two people tell you, you begin to wonder. If three say it’s true, you’re convinced there’s a tiger in your neighborhood and you panic.

Buridan’s Ass: A thirsty donkey is placed exactly midway between two pails of water. It dies because it can’t make a rational decision about which one to choose. A form of decision paralysis.

Pareto Principle: The majority of outcomes are driven by a minority of events.

Sturgeon’s Law: “90% of everything is crap.” The obvious inverse of the Pareto Principle, but hard to accept in practice.

Cumulative advantage: Social status snowballs in either direction because people like associating with successful people, so doors are opened for them, and avoid associating with unsuccessful people, for whom doors are closed.

Impostor Syndrome: Fear of being exposed as less talented than people think you are, often because talent is owed to cumulative advantage rather than actual effort or skill.

Anscombe’s Quartet: Four sets of numbers that look identical on paper (mean average, variance, correlation, etc.) but look completely different when graphed. Describes a situation where exact calculations don’t offer a good representation of how the world works.

Ringelmann Effect: Members of a group become lazier as the size of their group increases. Based on the assumption that “someone else is probably taking care of that.”

Semmelweis Reflex: Automatically rejecting evidence that contradicts your tribe’s established norms. Named after a Hungarian doctor who discovered that patients treated by doctors who wash their hands suffer fewer infections, but struggled to convince other doctors that his finding was true.

False-Consensus Effect: Overestimating how widely held your own beliefs are, caused by the difficulty of imagining the experiences of other people.

Boomerang Effect: Trying to persuade someone to do one thing can make them more likely to do the opposite, because the act of persuasion can feel like someone stealing your freedom and doing the opposite makes you feel like you’re taking your freedom back.

Chronological Snobbery: “The assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. You must find why it went out of date. Was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where, and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do? If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this, one passes to the realization that our own age is also ‘a period,’ and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions.” – C.S. Lewis

Planck’s Principle: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

McNamara Fallacy: A belief that rational decisions can be made with quantitative measures alone, when in fact the things you can’t measure are often the most consequential. Named after Defense Secretary McNamara, who tried to quantify every aspect of the Vietnam War.

Courtesy Bias: Giving opinions that are likely to offend people the least, rather than what you actually believe.

Berkson’s Paradox: Strong correlations can fall apart when combined with a larger population. Among hospital patients, motorcycle crash victims wearing helmets are more likely to be seriously injured than those not wearing helmets. But that’s because most crash victims saved by helmets did not need to become hospital patients, and those without helmets are more likely to die before becoming a hospital patient.

Group Attribution Error: Incorrectly assuming that the views of a group member reflect those of the whole group.

Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon: Noticing an idea everywhere you look as soon as it’s brought to your attention in a way that makes you overestimate its prevalence.

Ludic Fallacy: Falsely associated simulations with real life. Nassim Taleb: “Organized competitive fighting trains the athlete to focus on the game and, in order not to dissipate his concentration, to ignore the possibility of what is not specifically allowed by the rules, such as kicks to the groin, a surprise knife, et cetera. So those who win the gold medal might be precisely those who will be most vulnerable in real life.”

Normalcy Bias: Underestimating the odds of disaster because it’s comforting to assume things will keep functioning the way they’ve always functioned.

Actor-Observer Asymmetry: We judge others based solely on their actions, but when judging ourselves we have an internal dialogue that justifies our mistakes and bad decisions.

The 90-9-1 Rule: In social media networks, 90% of users just read content, 9% of users contribute a little content, and 1% of users contribute almost all the content. Gives a false impression of what ideas are popular or “average.”

Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy: Goals set retroactively after an activity, like shooting a blank wall and then drawing a bullseye around the holes you left, or picking a benchmark after you’ve invested.

Fredkin’s Paradox: Confronted with two equally good options, you struggle to decide, even though your decision doesn’t matter because both options are equally good. The more equal the options, the harder the decision.

Poisoning the Well: Presenting irrelevant adverse information about someone in a way that makes everything else that person says seem untrustworthy. “Before you hear my opponent’s healthcare plan, let me remind you that he got a DUI in college.”

Golem Effect: Performance declines when supervisors/teachers have low expectations of your abilities.

Appeal to Consequences: Arguing that a hypothesis must be true (or false) because the outcome is something you like (or dislike). The classic example is arguing that climate change isn’t real because combating climate change will hurt the economy.

Plain Folks Fallacy: People of authority acquiring trust by presenting themselves as Average Joe’s, when in fact their authority proves they are different from everyone else.

Behavioral Inevitability: “History never repeats itself; man always does.” – Voltaire

Apophenia: A tendency to perceive correlations between unrelated things, because your mind can only deal with tiny sample sizes and assuming things are correlated creates easy/comforting explanations of how the world works.

Self-Handicapping: Avoiding effort because you don’t want to deal with the emotional pain of that effort failing.

Hanlon’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”

False Uniqueness Effect: Assuming your skills are unique when they’re not. Comes from conflating “I’m good at this” with “Others are bad at this.”

Hard-Easy Effect: Hard tasks promote overconfidence because the rewards are high and fun to dream about; easy tasks promote underconfidence because they’re boring and easy to put off.

Neglect of Probability: Arguing that Nate Silver was wrong when he said Hillary Clinton has a 70% chance of winning, and using Donald Trump’s victory as your proof. Good predictions are based on probabilities, but the assessment of predictions are always binary, right or wrong.

Cobra Effect: Attempting to solve a problem makes that problem worse. Comes from an Indian story about a city infested with snakes offering a bounty for every dead cobra, which caused entrepreneurs to start breeding cobras for slaughter.

Braess’s Paradox: Adding more roads can make traffic worse because new shortcuts become popular and overcrowded.

Non-Ergodic: When group probabilities don’t apply to singular events. If 100 people play Russian Roulette once, the odds of dying might be, say, 10%. But if one person plays Russian Roulette 100 times, the odds are dying are practically 100%.

Pollyanna Principle: It’s easier to remember happy memories than bad ones.

Declinism: Perpetually viewing society as in decline, because you’re afflicted by the Pollyanna Principle and you forget how much things sucked in the past.

Empathy Gap: Underestimating how you’ll behave when you’re “hot” (angry/aroused/rushed), caused by the inability to accurately foresee how your body’s physical response to situations (dopamine, adrenaline, etc.) will influence decision-making.

Abilene Paradox: A group decides to do something that no one in the group wants to do because everyone mistakenly assumes they’re the only ones who object to the idea and they don’t want to rock the boat by speaking up.

Collective Narcissism: Exaggerating the importance and influence of your social group (country, industry, company, department, etc.).

Moral Luck: Praising someone for a good deed they didn’t have full control over. “Avoid calling heroes those who had no other choice.” – Taleb.

Feedback Loops: Falling stock prices scare people, which cause them to sell, which makes prices fall, which scares more people, which causes more people to sell, and so on. Works both ways.

Hawthorne Effect: Being watched/studied changes how people behave, making it difficult to conduct social studies that accurately reflect the real world.

Perfect Solution Fallacy: Comparing reality with an idealized alternative. Prevalent in any field governed by uncertainty.

Weasel Words: Phrases that appear to have meaning but convey nothing tangible. “Growth was solid last quarter,” or “Many people believe.”

Hormesis: Something that hurts you in a high dose can be good for you in small doses. (Weight on your bones, drinking red wine, etc.)

Backfiring Effect: A supercharged version of confirmation bias where being presented with evidence that goes against your beliefs makes you double down on your initial beliefs because you feel you’re being attacked.

Reflexivity: When cause and effect are the same. People think Tesla will sell a lot of cars, so Tesla stock goes up, which lets Tesla raise a bunch of new capital, which helps Tesla sell a lot of cars.

Second Half of the Chessboard: Put one grain of rice on the first chessboard square, two on the next, four on the next, then eight, then sixteen, etc, doubling the amount of rice on each square. When you’ve covered half the chessboard’s squares you’re dealing with an amount of rice that can fit in your lap; in the second half you quickly get to a pile that will consume an entire city. That’s how compounding works: slowly, then ferociously.

Peter Principle: Good workers will continue to be promoted until they end up in a role they’re bad at.

Friendship Paradox: On average, people have fewer friends than their friends have. Occurs because people with an abnormally high number of friends are more likely to be one of your friends. It’s a fundamental part of social network dynamics and makes most people feel less popular than they are.

Hedonic Treadmill: Expectations rise with results, so nothing feels as good as you’d imagine for as long as you’d expect.

Positive Illusions: Excessively rosy views about the decisions you’ve made to maintain self-esteem in a world where everyone makes bad decisions all the time.

Ironic Process Theory: Going out of your way to suppress thoughts makes those thoughts more prominent in your mind.

Clustering Illusions: Falsely assuming that the inevitable bunching of random results in a large sample indicates a trend.

Foundational Species: A single thing that plays an outsized role in supporting an ecosystem, whose loss would pull down many others with it. In nature: kelp, algae, and coral. In business: The Federal Reserve and Amazon.

Bizarreness Effect: Crazy things are easier to remember than common things, providing a distorted sense of “normal.”

Nonlinearity: Outputs aren’t always proportional to inputs, so the world is a barrage of massive wins and horrible losses that surprise people.

Moderating Relationship: The correlation between two variables depends on a third, seemingly unrelated variable. The quality of a marriage may be dependent on a spouse’s work project that’s causing stress.

Denomination Effect: One hundred $1 bills feels like less money than one $100 bill. Also explains stock splits – buying 10 shares for $10 each feels cheaper than one share for $100.

Woozle Effect: “A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth.” - Daniel Kahneman.

Google Scholar Effect: Scientific research depends on citing other research, and the research that gets cited the most is whatever shows up in the top results of Google Scholar searches, regardless of its contribution to the field.

Inversion: Avoiding problems can be more important than scoring wins.

Gambler’s Ruin: Has many meanings, the most important of which is that playing a negative-probability game persistently enough guarantees going broke.

Principle of Least Effort: When seeking information, effort declines as soon as the minimum acceptable result is reached.

Dunning-Kruger Effect: Knowing the limits of your intelligence requires a certain level of intelligence, so some people are too stupid to know how stupid they are.

Knightian Uncertainty: Risk that can’t be measured; admitting that you don’t know what you don’t know.

Aumann’s Agreement Theorem: If you understand your opponent’s beliefs you cannot agree to disagree. If you agree to disagree it’s because one side doesn’t understand the other side’s view.

Focusing Effect: Overemphasizing factors that seem important but exist as part of a complex system. People from the Midwest assume Californians are happier because the weather is better, but they’re not because Californians also deal with traffic, bad bosses, unhappy marriages, etc, which more than offset the happiness boost from sunny skies.

The Middle Ground Fallacy: Falsely assuming that splitting the difference between two polar opposite views is a healthy compromise. If one person says vaccines cause autism and another person says they don’t, it’s not right to compromise and say vaccines sometimes cause autism.

Rebound Effect: New symptoms, or supercharged old symptoms, emerge when medicine or other protections are withdrawn.

Ostrich Effect: Avoiding negative information that might challenge views that you desperately want to be right.

Founder’s Syndrome: When a CEO is so emotionally invested in a company that they can’t effectively delegate decisions.

In-Group Favoritism: Giving preference to people from your social group regardless of their objective qualifications.

Bounded Rationality: People can’t be fully rational because your brain is a hormone machine, not an Excel spreadsheet.

Luxury Paradox: The more expensive something is the less likely you are to use it, so the relationship between price and utility is an inverted U. Ferraris sit in garages; Hondas get driven.

Meat Paradox: Dogs are family, pigs are food. Some animals classified as food are wrongly perceived to have lower intelligence than those classified as pets. An example of morality depending on utility.

Fluency Heuristic: Ideas that can be explained simply are more likely to be believed than those that are complex, even if the simple-sounding ideas are nonsense. It occurs because ideas that are easy to grasp are hard to distinguish from ideas you’re familiar with.

Historical Wisdom: “The dead outnumber the living 14 to 1, and we ignore the accumulated experience of such a huge majority of mankind at our peril.” – Niall Ferguson

Fact-Check Scarcity Principle: This article is called 100 Little Ideas but there are fewer than 100 ideas. 99% of readers won’t notice because they’re not checking, and most of those who notice won’t say anything. Don’t believe everything you read.

Emotional Contagion: One person’s emotions trigger the same emotions in other people, because evolution has selected for empathizing with those in your social group whose actions you rely on.

Tribal Affiliation: Beliefs can be swayed by identity and a desire to fit in over rational analysis. There is little correlation between climate change denial and scientific literacy. But there is a strong correlation between climate change denial and political affiliation.

Emotional Competence: The ability to recognize others’ emotions and respond to them productively. Harder and rarer than it sounds.

Great People Do This!



A mediocre person tells. 

A good person explains.

A superior person demonstrates. 

A great person inspires others to see for themselves


~ Harvey Mackay

Sunday, December 05, 2021

A Case for Character - Rewind

 The character issue has been in the forefront as of late.  One of the most famous case's of a man’s character being called into question was President Clinton’s when he lied to the American people about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.  Many other cases have been in the news lately regarding ministers, politicians, teachers, and others.

In the 1996 Presidential campaign, Senator Bob Dole made the character issue one of the cornerstones of his campaign. Senator Dole believed, as well as many of us, that character and personal integrity are more important than Gallup poll results, political campaign slogans, or 30-second sound bites on the evening news.

In his book, “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”, Stephen Covey discusses character by putting it into terms of what he calls the “Character Ethic” (32).  The Character Ethic is based on basic principles such as, humility, integrity, fidelity, temperance, courage, justice, fairness, service, patience, modesty, and the Golden Rule.  The Character Ethic defines the parameters by which personal character is measured.  By using principles as our guiding beacon, it can be concluded that success and self-respect come from incorporating basic principles into our daily lives.

Character builds on the idea that principles guide our effectiveness and to many extents our self worth.  Principles according to Stephen Covey are “natural laws that can’t be broken” (33).  Most rational people would agree that principles are universal in all societies.  They are common to almost every major religion, ethnic group, and social institution throughout the world.  Principles are fundamental truths handed down through the ages that have universal application.  Principles should drive our values, and values in turn give us a direction for our lives, much like a roadmap.  “Values, are the worth or priority we place on people, things, ideas, or principles.  Principles are self-evident and are enabling when understood” (Franklin Covey 11).  If our values are derived from principles (and they must be to have good character), we, by default, will have a solid foundation on which to build good character.

Most reasonable people would agree that one of the most important groups of people that must possess and exhibit a strong Character Ethic are our leaders.  Too many times we are disappointed that our leaders are unwilling or unable to take a stand for what is good, decent, right, and fair.  We see examples in the media every day where corporate, political, and religious leaders take the easy way out.  They do what is best for them, and their constituents, and not what is in the best interest of society.  Many people over the course of the last 15 years have fit in this role.  Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, Bill Clinton, and Richard Nixon all conjure up memories of men that have made poor decisions, based upon selfishness, and not principles.  When leaders fail to rely on principles to make the important decisions, they are no longer credible or fit to lead.

Character, as stated earlier, uses principles as its underlying foundation.  Our own personal values must be derived from these principles to start the process of building character.  We have learned from the public mistakes of others that you cannot have good character while neglecting core principles.  We all must keep trust and trustworthiness as core principles, without which, it won’t be possible to obtain or keep a reputation as having good character.

Effective leaders, and all people must have the trust of others, and more importantly, must be worthy of that trust.  Trust, is not given, it is earned.  Once you have lost people’s trust, and especially if you are considered to be a leader or role model, you have immediately lost much of your effectiveness with your constituents.

Character, is not something you acquire overnight.  It is a result of a lifetime of effort.  It only takes one incident for your character to be called in to question.  Once your character comes into question, even for a single issue, such as a lie or indiscretion, your reputation, and all that you have worked towards, will be called into question. 

In the end, we would all do well to surround ourselves with people that exhibit high ethical standards and lead principle-centered lives.  These individuals, will help us along our journeys by showing us through their example how to live and work in a world which seems to no longer hold the Character Ethic as fundamentally important.



Works Cited

Covey, Stephen R. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Fireside, 1990

Franklin Covey Co. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People Training Program Manual. 1998 ed.


Thursday, December 02, 2021

Enough!


Chapters from the book "Enough: True Measures of Money, Business, and Life " by John C. Bogle.

Buy this book if you have had Enough.

"Too Much Cost, Not Enough Value"
Too Much Speculation, Not Enough Investment"
"Too Much Complexity, Not Enough Simplicity"
"Too Much Counting, Not Enough Trust"
"Too Much Business Conduct, Not Enough Professional Conduct"
"Too Much Salesmanship, Not Enough Stewardship"
"Too Much Focus on Things, Not Enough Focus on Commitment"
"Too Many Twenty-first Century Values, Not Enough Eighteenth-Century Values"
"Too Much 'Success,' Not Enough Character"

Mr. Bogle begins with this:

"At a party given by a billionaire on Shelter Island, Kurt Vonnegut informs his pal, Joseph Heller, that their host, a hedge fund manager, had made more money in a single day than Heller had earned from his wildly popular novel Catch-22 over its whole history. Heller responds, 'Yes, but I have something he will never have; Enough".

Monday, October 11, 2021

Project Management Office Setup Thoughts


  • Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of existing project managers and project support personnel
  • Develop a basic project management training plan for the entire organization to familiarize all with the project management verbiage and practices
  • Identify and provide specialized advanced training for all project leaders and functional managers
  • Develop a project management office (PMO) to provide enterprise coaching, and to develop and manage your organization’s project management methodology
  • In addition to the methodology, the PMO should develop and maintain standard project management templates for the organization to use
  • Ensure that existing projects are audited and meet your organization’s minimum project management standards
  • Setup a program where your PMO provides coaching to less experienced project managers and oversight of all enterprise projects
  • Ensure all projects have Lessons Learned captured