The Agile Mindset - Beginner's Mind, Availability Bias
Loud and present doesn't mean correct and useful.
(This article is part of an on-going series dedicated to developing Agile mastery. Each post offers value to students on this journey, however, there is an advantage to those who start at the beginning.)
As I was leaving a conference room after an all too unproductive meeting, I was captured by one of my developers, Eric, who was visibly distressed. We stepped back into the now empty conference room and he closed the door. "Prepare thyself, for drama approacheth," I said to myself. After listening to a lengthy history and theory on the source of agony for Eric, I set out to discover the rest of the story. If you've ever had to manage people the result of my exploration will no doubt leave you unsurprised. The other people involved, in this case two, had significantly different experiences of the issue.
Eric, who was new to the team, was upset about several changes made to the host system by two other developers. These changes caused Eric's code to perform poorly. The information I got from my other two developers combined with my own understanding of the host system gave me confidence that Eric’s concerns were unfounded.
While much of his complaint was composed of technical filler, the most important piece of information Eric shared in the conference room was that with his previous employer, he had, in his view, been unfairly blamed for performance issues due to his code. Had he more experience with the host system and, more importantly, the personalities of two experienced developers, Eric likely wouldn't have come to this conclusion. Lacking that experience, Eric was relying on less reliable but more available information with respect to how he would be treated and so he jumped ahead of the conclusion curve.
Three key elements influenced the decisions and conclusions Eric made.
The issue with Eric's previous employer was recent.
The memory of the issue was vivid and negative.
He had no counterexamples within our work environment.
These elements are indicative of a cognitive bias known as the availability bias or heuristic. In Eric's case, they combined to affect his judgement of events at his hew workplace. Because of the recency and intensity of Eric past experience, he assigned an inaccurate probability to the likelihood of a reoccurrence of the past experience in the future.
The fix was relatively easy: Pair Eric with the two experienced developers long enough to sort out the code issues together. The result was Eric gained a much better understanding of the host system (and how his code influences it) and, more importantly, gained experience with the other two developer's personalities. The antidote to Eric's fear was to increase this familiarity with the system and his co-workers. (For my own self, this experience revealed an important on-boarding step that I worked to incorporate with future new hires.)
Every decision we make is influenced by what we remember. When weighing various options, we recall past events and experiences that are similar to the situation we are facing. The more recent they are, the easier they are recalled. Last in, first out. Far from being raw data, what we recall is wrapped up with beliefs, values, and emotions. All this gets milled and filtered by a host of cognitive biases.
As a generalized thought experiment, what would the outcome have been if a manager had responded to Eric's concern using patterns similar to Eric’s?
The manager's most recent experience is with the two familiar developers. Knowing them to be proven experts and not likely to over-react, exaggerate, or conceal important information, it's probable the manager would form a negative opinion of Eric and be less likely to trust his assessment of future issues. As a consequence, this would likely reaffirm Eric's expectation of being blamed for code-based system issues in the future and reinforce his overall defensiveness and distrust of his co-workers. Eric's co-workers will no doubt sense his distrust and reciprocate the feeling. None of this end's well.
Yet, I didn't respond this way. What made that possible? My experience with managing people has lead to the curation of a large set of questions to keep front and center when personnel issues occur. A few that figured in Eric's issue include:
Who else is involved with this issue?
What are the issues behind the issue?
What are the consequences of various courses of action?
To hone your own awareness of the availability bias and develop ways to work with it's effects, invest some of your time to complete the following exercise. As before, I highly recommend that you write out your answers with paper and pen.
Think of an interaction you've had with another person whom you would consider a close acquaintance. You know them a little, but wouldn't consider them a friend or family. It doesn't matter if it’s a positive or negative interaction. What matters is that it’s memorable. As you think through that interaction, ask and answer for yourself the following questions:
What had I been experiencing just prior to the interaction?
What emotions was I experiencing just prior to the interaction?
Had I experienced similar interactions with other close acquaintances?
Had I experienced similar interactions with close friends or family?
What was my perception of the close acquaintance on subsequent interactions?
If you have any questions, need anything clarified, or have something else on your mind, please use the comments section.