![]() They think that gut feeling will provide better solutions, and faster. The authors anticipate opposition to their recommendations: “two groups reject the power of framing: the emotionalists and the hyper-rationalists.” Emotionalists deny the need for evidence, scientific experimentation, and rational analysis. For instance, is Jeff Bezos’ adoption of a business model without profit an example of an old frame being adapted, or a new frame being selected? Opposition However, it’s not entirely clear that the examples the authors give for the various elements of their advice apply specifically to the idea they are supposed to illustrate. The book has a felicity of phrasing, with numerous nostrums concisely couched, such as “explaining the world to others leads to understanding it better oneself,” “much of life is revising what we thought we knew but really didn’t”, and “ had become not only farmers, but framers.” The authors reject this idea, as we are always inside a box. ![]() This is different from thinking outside the box, a phrase whose origins lie in a business psychology experiment called the nine-dot test, which is illustrated on the book’s cover. But sometimes we need to ditch a frame and replace it, either with an existing one from our repertoire, or – rarely, and with caution - with a whole new one. They give many examples of how to do this. To use our existing frames well, they argue that we need to apply causality, counterfactuals, and constraints. And we can change them when they become obsolete or misleading. They want to show us that these frames are tools, and that we can optimise their use. They don’t want to just point out how powerfully we are influenced by our perspectives and prejudices – our frames. Opimising framesĬukier and his co-authors have a more ambitious project than Kahneman and Harari. Its relatively small states jostled and competed for advantage, and their rivalry prompted them to adopt and adapt their mental models to great effect. But in the late middle ages, a unified China turned inward, while a fragmented Europe looked outward in the Age of Exploration. Likewise, for most of human history, Europe was a relative backwater, while Asia, and especially China, was more advanced scientifically and economically.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |