From Bias to Blame. From Blame to Failure.

Ask yourself, how biased are you?  If you’re anything like 660 of the 661 people interviewed as part of Dr Irene Scopelliti’s 2015 Management Science Report, then you’re pretty certain you’re far less biased than the average person.

Defined as the Bias Blindspot, the findings suggest that ‘we’re much less likely to recognise bias in ourselves than we are in others’.  In other words, we consider ourselves largely immune to the pitfalls of bias but acknowledge that it’s something that effects everybody else.  Doctors receiving gifts from pharmaceutical companies, politicians accepting donations from big business and fund managers benefitting from weekend breaks in the Cotswolds or Martha’s Vineyard insist that these gratuities will in no way cloud their rational judgement but admit that they can see how it could easily impact that of many of their friends or colleagues.

And before you say to yourself “ahh, but I’m well-schooled and this ain’t my first rodeo” researchers can find little or no correlation between our vulnerability to the Bias Blindspot and our levels of intelligence, education or experience.

So, what causes it and what are the implications for making decisions, solving problems or improving productivity, quality or safety?

One theory is that the Blindspot is a sort of defense mechanism.  The logic goes something like this; We see bias as bad.  We want to see ourselves as good.  So, we define ourselves as unbiased. If we want to be ‘good’ then we must frame all our decisions as rational. If others’ decisions are different to ours, then reason dictates that they must be biased.  And bias is…bad!

Using this rationale, it’s easy to see how blame can spring from this mindset.  Findings suggest there is a strong relationship between the scale of an individual’s Bias Blindspot and the likelihood that they fixate their decision-making and problem-solving on individuals – with solutions relying only on people and funneled towards discipline.  Equally there are number of further undesirable traits that often-come hand-in-hand with the Bias Blindspot;

• A reluctance to seek or take advice
• A reliance on rules and procedures
• A likelihood that alternative viewpoints will be dismissed
• A likelihood that missing information will be overlooked
• A poor response to training – particularly that which aims to reduce bias!
• Comfort with a limited perspective
• Self-created barriers to improvement and training
• Weaker and less accurate self-assessment
• A propensity to jump to conclusions or solutions

As you won’t see any of these traits in yourself (we’ve already established that you are 100% free of bias and totally rational) but you probably do recognise at least some of them in your colleagues, clients and family members, it begs the question ‘what can we do about this?’

The simple answer is that we need an alternative method for major problem-solving. As we’re all but blind to the issue it’s not simply a case of simply deciding all of a sudden that we’re going to massively reduce our personal (or our organisational) bias.  It’s probably safe to say ‘Bias-free Tuesday’ will not be the next ‘Meat-free Monday’.  What we need is a robust, easy to adopt method, one that helps us overcome these undesirable traits when it matters most, and help deliver evidence-based, more rational decisions.  Something that will reveal bias, slow down our fast thinking and offer a different, more objective way forward.

That’s where a structured method like Root Cause Analysis comes into its own.  Done well, RCA provides an easy to follow route-map to better solutions.  Outcomes are driven by teams across key departments. They collaborate to build a shared understanding of an event, opportunity or problem, using logical cause and effect charting (backed by strong evidence) and they propose solutions that have been stress-tested from multiple perspectives.

Implemented with structure and drive, a good RCA program delivers layer upon layer of powerful solutions that both correct and prevent. RCA solutions focus on long-lasting systemic weaknesses rather than short-term ‘people fixes’.  The ultimate outcome is a culture of stronger collaboration and reduced-conflict, where evidence surpasses opinion and where good solutions matter, along with the teams that uncover them.  Fundamentally, collaboration, cause & effect logic, and a focus on reliance on evidence conspire to create an environment that is toxic to bias.

So, I’ll conclude with a question. In 2018, when leading organisations structure and manage information, activity and productivity at unprecedented rates, how can it be that something as utterly fundamental as problem-solving and major decision-making is ad hoc at best?

Perhaps they are just biased against the alternatives?