People often believe that an outcome was predictable or even inevitable, after they know what that outcome was. When we do this, sometimes we're right, but often our sense of predictability or inevitability is exaggerated. This perception is so common that psychologists have given it a name: hindsight bias. Because of hindsight bias, we tend to see causal connections between antecedent conditions and outcomes, even when those supposedly causal connections are false. We tend not to recall conditions that would introduce uncertainty in the outcome, or which would tend to produce dramatically different outcomes. And we do recall elements that didn't exist if they support explanations that predict what actually happened.
For example, in a written evaluation of a subordinate's performance, a supervisor might observe, "George's impulsiveness created toxic conflict, not only involving George, but also between other team members." Toxic conflict might well have occurred, but was George's impulsiveness really the cause? Or was it an effect? A more useful comment would have provided evidence for the supposed causal connection, and it would have addressed alternative explanations for the toxic conflict that did occur.
Here are three suggestions for managing the risk of hindsight bias in the workplace.
- Awareness is essential
- Ignorance of hindsight bias allows it to thrive. Educate all those responsible for interpreting past events. Give them the tools they need to detect hindsight bias in themselves and their own thinking.
- Accept that hindsight bias is a risk, and mitigate the risk
- Although awareness and sensitivity can reduce the incidence of hindsight bias, total elimination is almost certainly impossible. Cooperative action is required. For example, in the performance appraisal process, supervisor and subordinate can be encouraged to discuss the possible presence of hindsight bias in the appraisal, and then come to agreement that they have dealt with those possibilities. Introducing this idea into the appraisal process is an example of mitigating hindsight bias risk.
- Identify processes at risk of hindsight bias
- Some processes are especially vulnerable to hindsight bias. The two mentioned here — performanceIgnorance of hindsight
bias allows it to thrive appraisal and project retrospectives — are merely examples. Strategic decisions, including decisions such as reorganizations, acquisitions, relocations, downsizing, outsourcing, and more, are often subject to evaluation, and therefore hindsight bias risk. An inventory of all processes for hindsight bias vulnerability is a necessary element of any program to address the effects of hindsight bias.
After identifying those processes most susceptible to hindsight bias risk, mitigation is the next step. Mitigation approaches must suit the process, but effective measures include checks and balances along the lines of the approach indicated above for risk management in the performance appraisal process. Multiple viewpoints and healthy, vigorous dialog are essential. Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenpMGcxbLKYWiTRiSZner@ChacAkrHYHJnoucxxGdsoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Emotions at Work:
- The Slippery Slope That Isn't
- "If we promote you, we'll have to promote all of them, too." This "slippery-slope"
tactic for winning debates works by exploiting our fears. Another in a series about rhetorical tricks
that push our buttons.
- Coping with Problems
- How we cope with problems is a choice. When we choose our coping style, we help determine our ability
to address the problems we face. Of eight styles we can identify, only one is universally constructive,
and we rarely use it.
- Irrational Self-Interest
- When we try to influence others, especially large groups or entire companies, we sometimes create packages
of incentives and disincentives that are intended to affect behavior. These strategies usually assume
that people make choices on rational grounds. Is this assumption valid?
- Responding to Threats: III
- Workplace threats come in a variety of flavors. One class of threats is indirect. Threateners who use
the indirect threats aim to evoke fear of consequences brought about not by the threatener, but by other
parties. Indirect threats are indeed warnings, but not in the way you might think.
- Good Change, Bad Change: II
- When we distinguish good change from bad, we often get it wrong: we favor things that would harm us,
and shun things that would help. When we do get it wrong, we're sometimes misled by social factors.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming February 21: The Ultimate Attribution Error at Work
- When we attribute the behavior of members of groups to some cause, either personal or situational, we tend to make systematic errors. Those errors can be expensive and avoidable. Available here and by RSS on February 21.
- And on February 28: Narcissistic Behavior at Work: I
- Briefly, when people exhibit narcissistic behavior they're engaging in activity that systematically places their own interests and welfare ahead of the interests and welfare of anyone or anything else. It's behavior that threatens the welfare of the organization and everyone employed there. Available here and by RSS on February 28.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenUGdTJxyfzGRTwbAQner@ChachPbnPbUXfaSTrWlhoCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.