DELETED

16.5. DELETED.

16.6.

Mental Frames

Each of us uses mental frameworks and shortcuts to simplify our understanding of a complex world. The use of frameworks helps us process information quickly and efficiently.

Frames consist of our assumptions about how things are related and how they work. This effect is particularly noticeable when framing a challenge as either a risk or an opportunity.

Research shows that the human mind naturally estimates the expected return associated with a risky situation. Leaders of any organization or decision-making team must be careful about imposing mental frames on themselves and their teams where critical thinking is needed.

Prospect Theory. Prospect theory is commonly recognized as the act of framing a situation as a potential gain that causes decision-makers to act differently than when framing the same situation as a potential loss.

Prospect theory helps explain our tendency to escalate commitment based on sunk costs instead of making rational evaluations. Based on sunk cost arguments, leaders often take on more risk, committing additional resources to avoid losses even when the chances of success are low. Gamblers placing bets even when they are experiencing a losing streak is an example of prospect theory in that the ‘chances’ of winning seem greater with each chance taken.

Change. Another implication of framing is how organizations react when faced with changes in the operating environment or mission tasking. At the organizational level, threats to our comfortable framework of assumptions are often met with rigid resistance, while changes we see as opportunities are met with flexibility and adaptability. As human beings, Airmen are subject to the initial frameworks we establish when confronting change. For good or bad, these frameworks act to limit the information we take in, our willingness to fairly and unbiasedly assess information, and ultimately restrict the solution sets we create.

Consciously avoid an inherent tendency to view change as threatening. Intentionally framing change as an opportunity may allow others to freely exercise the habits of mind necessary to make well informed decisions.

Analogies. Analogies are often powerful decision-making tools.

Great innovative breakthroughs can sometimes occur when analogies from one field or domain are applied to another. Reasoning by analogy occurs when we assess a situation and match it to similar experiences we have previously encountered. At the conscious level, analogies can be used to save time and provide clues about courses of action and implications for a decision-making process. However, without deliberate consideration, analogies may lead us to focus on similarities between events and downplay important differences. When allowing analogy in decision-making, effort should be made to clearly separate fact from assumption. The act of questioning assumptions in any decisionmaking process is, at its heart, how we apply the habits of mind necessary for good critical thought.

Intuition. Intuition can complement a decision-maker when used in conjunction with the evaluation of a whole series of alternatives and not solely based on objective analysis. A strength of using intuition is that it is based on matching patterns from previous experiences to cues picked up in the current environment. Based on recognition of patterns, decision-makers may select a course of action as if reading a script instead of truly exploring options. Having decided on an initial preferred course of action, senior leaders often mentally play out a solution, and if it seems feasible, they go with it. Note: Proper use of combined intuitive judgment along with formal

analysis may be an effective decision-making technique. Formal analysis can check intuition, while intuition is useful in validating and testing assumptions that underlie analysis. As Airmen, recognizing the value of intuition is just as critical as guarding against a lack of analysis in the decision-making process.