Featured post

Being Curious will not kill the #CDO

The last article was about being railroaded in the first 100 days, recognising that you are forced into a decision.  In this one I wanted to unpack that “data” shows that using science in an argument (say to defend against railroading) just makes the members of the team more partisan (aligned to their own confirmation bias and opinions).  As the #CDO, your job is to use data and science, therefore in the first 100 days, with this insight, you are more likely to lose more people than win friends, lose more arguments than win and create bigger hurdles?   What I suggest, based on this work is that to overcome “proof by science” is to use curiosity to bring us together. Image source: from a good article by Douglas Longenecker --- Dan Kahan , a Yale behavioural economist, has spent the last decade studying whether the use of reason aggravates or reduces “partisan” beliefs. His research papers are here . His research shows that aggravation and alienation easily win, irrespective of being

Questions to help frame your own paradoxes!

Questions to help frame your own paradoxes Leadership must be able to recognise the paradoxes created as they decide on “ what they are optimising for. ” The last article described two different starting points for the Peak Paradox model; finding paradox and living with paradox .  It is evident that the compromises we elect to live with become more focused as we agreed or decide on what we are optimising for.  Such a focus has a benefit insomuch that the narrower and more articulate our view of optimised becomes, the more decisions can become aligned . However, the counter is that whilst a sharp focus and alignment will require less compromise for some, but it will equally increase the paradoxes/ compromises and tensions others will have to live with.  One team can be aligned to a vision but not necessarily on how to get there or live with the chosen “optimised” approach.  Stress is created by these differences and can create cracks and weaknesses in the team and culture. One visio

Choice, decision making and judgment; is your relationship constructive or destructive?

What is NEW in this article about decision making? The new part explains the relationship between choices, decisions and judgement and how our questions indicate if our relationship is curious and constructive OR linear, framed, and destructive.  This article is part of a masterclass I have been creating on how we, as directors and those in leadership, can improve our choices, decisions and judgements using data and be better ancestors.  This article is not another self-help or “use this framework to improve decision making”; it is for the curious and those who ask questions on their journey. The refelction at the end should be "How does this article affect our views on the automation of decision making and the use of AI?" Why is this an important topic? Our individual and unique view of the world comprises layers of constructs created by our personality, biases, preferences, facts, and ideas learnt from past experiences.  These constructs are better known as “mental models

The railroad of (no) choice

In those first 100 days, it will become evident if you are about to be railroaded or if you have to present the choice without creating railroading for those data laggards. The latter being the job, the former being a problem. To be clear, railroaded means in this context: to force  something  to be officially approved or accepted without much discussion or thought. to force  someone  into doing something quickly, usually without enough information. As the CDO, are you about to find that the tracks have already been laid and that you on the train and it is going in one direction. You are now the figurehead of the new shinny data plan based on already accepted wisdom. Your hope, before starting the role, is that it is more analogous to a personal transport situation. This would be where you get to pick the fuel (food, combustible), vehicle (walk, run, bike, motorcycle, car, van, lorry, aeroplane, boat), the destination and the route. Using the analogy of the train on the tracks, the de