Judgement: The skill AI can't replace
Free masterclass page 3 of 3
Your judgement toolkit
Three organisations. Three industries. Three different constellations of traps. The scale was large but the mechanisms were not. Overconfidence operates the same way in a team of eight as it does in a surgical ward. Groupthink is no less potent in a Monday morning stand-up than in a Pixar screening room. And incentive misalignment doesn't need a stack ranking system to do its damage. A single misaligned bonus target will do. The same underlying logic holds at every scale: no single tool fixed the problem. A portfolio of practices, applied across the layers where judgement actually operates, changed the conditions in which decisions were made.
Here are six of those practices, drawn from a working set of about fifty, organised across the three layers where your judgement operates.
Scientists are clear on this: there is no one-to-one mapping of trap to cure for the errors that involve automatic associations or motivated reasoning. Overconfidence, for example, is partially addressed by tracking your predictions over time, partially by searching for reasons you might be wrong, partially by ensuring people in a group commit to their views independently before discussing them. None of these alone solves it. Together, they build the kind of thinker, and the kind of team, that overconfidence finds harder to take hold in.
The same is true for virtually every deep trap. Each is addressed by several tools simultaneously. Each tool addresses several traps.
Making it stick
Txx