AI is helping leaders make decisions faster, and in some cases, more accurately. But speed is not the same as wisdom, and accuracy is not the same as judgment. Effective leaders know when to trust the machine, when to trust the room, and when to trust their instincts.

Each source of guidance has strengths, and each has blind spots. The challenge is knowing which one deserves the final say in a given situation.

Trust the machine for pattern and scale

AI is strongest when the problem is data-heavy, repetitive, or too large for a human to scan quickly. It can spot patterns, summarize information, compare options, and surface anomalies far faster than we can. In that sense, AI is a powerful amplifier of attention.

Use the machine when you need:

• Fast analysis across large amounts of data.
• Early warning signs or hidden patterns.
• Multiple options or scenario comparisons.

Despite appearances, the machine does not understand meaning the way people do. It may identify correlations without understanding context and produce confident output based on weak reasoning. Leaders need to guard against mistaking correlation for causation, a theme I explored in The Human Edge: Leadership in the AI Era. Trust the machine for pattern detection, not final judgment.

A useful question is:

Is this a problem of volume, repetition, or comparison?

If yes, the machine probably deserves a seat at the table.

Trust the room for reality and resonance

The room is where leadership becomes social. A room full of smart people can catch things no algorithm will spot: political nuance, emotional undercurrents, implementation friction, and the pragmatic reality of what people will support. Group dialogue is especially valuable when the issue affects alignment, trust, or commitment.

Use the room when you need:

• Broad perspectives on a complex decision.
• Early reaction to an idea, message, or plan.
• Reality checks on feasibility and adoption.
• Buy-in from the people who will live with the consequences.

The room is not always right, of course. Groups can drift into consensus too quickly, avoid hard truths, or simply amplify the loudest voice in the room. In the best case, however, collective intelligence will surface what individual brilliance misses. Trust the room when the issue depends on shared ownership, cultural fit, or real-world adoption. For more on the power of the group, see Facts don’t move people—peers do.

A useful question is:

What will this decision feel like to the people affected by it?

If that matters, the room matters, too.

Trust your instincts for ambiguity and meaning

Instincts are often dismissed as vague or unscientific, but our instincts are actually compressed experience. They are the brain’s way of drawing on years of exposure, tacit knowledge, and subtle signals that may be hard to articulate.

Use your instincts when:

• The situation is ambiguous or novel.
• Judgment about character, timing, or fit is required.
• The “right” answer is not fully knowable.
• Something feels off, even if you cannot determine why.

That said, instincts are not infallible. They can be distorted by fatigue, fear, ego, and bias. Strong leaders do not treat instinct as the sole source of truth; rather, they consider instinct a signal worth investigating. In ambiguous situations, further investigation is warranted because we may be tempted to rationalize what we want to believe instead of what we actually know, as I explored in Dissonance, decision making, and relationships.

A useful question is:

Is this intuition grounded in real-world experience, or just an emotional reaction?

It may be worth pausing to distinguish signal from stress, especially under pressure when emotions can masquerade as insight.

A simple rule for using the three sources of guidance

• Trust the machine when the problem is large, technical, or pattern based.
• Trust the room when the problem is human, political, or requires commitment.
• Trust your instincts when the problem is uncertain, time-sensitive, or resistant to analysis.

In most cases, the best problem-solving sequence is machine first, room second, instinct last. Let AI broaden your view, let the room test your assumptions, and let your instincts make the final call when the evidence is incomplete.

The order matters because it helps prevent both overreliance on technology and overreliance on opinion.

Leadership in the AI era is not about choosing between human intelligence and machine intelligence. It is about orchestrating them wisely. Discerning leaders know when to let the machine do what it does best, when to listen to the room, and when to trust the quiet signal that says this is the way forward.

Take time to reflect

Reflection turns practice into better judgment; as you review decisions and patterns, you build the habit of learning from your own leadership choices, a discipline I wrote about in Why reflection is important.

As you face your next important decision, pause and ask yourself:

Where am I over-trusting the machine?

Where am I relying too much on the room?

When have my instincts been grounded in experience rather than anxiety?

What might change if I slowed down long enough to separate signal from noise?

References

Clear, J. (2018). Why facts don’t change our minds. James Clear.

Jennings, R. E., et al. (2022). The power of reflection for would-be leaders: Investigating individual work reflection and its impact on leadership. Personnel Psychology.

Klein, G. A. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. MIT Press.

Milotich, M. (2014). Dissonance, decision making, and relationships. Claxus.

Milotich, M. (2023). Why reflection is important. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich.

Milotich, M. (2025a). The illusion of correlation: Avoiding false patterns in decision making. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich.

Milotich, M. (2025b). Facts don’t move people—peers do. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich.

Milotich, M. (2026). The Human Edge: Leadership in the AI Era. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich.

AI is transforming not only how we work, but also how we lead. While AI can increasingly handle data analysis, pattern recognition, and decision-making at superhuman speed, core leadership capabilities remain deeply human—and are more critical than ever.

Put simply, machines stumble where empathy, ethics, and intuition hold sway—that is, in almost any situation where people work together toward a shared goal. Future machines may well console, judge, and invent on par with humans, but they’re not there yet. Rather than hanging up your leadership hat, embrace AI as a way to extend, not diminish, your leadership impact.

Smart leaders harness the strengths of AI while doubling down on the human capabilities that cannot be automated.

Two reasons why AI can amplify—but not replace—great leaders

1. Machines optimize—people innovate

AI excels at crunching data to refine strategies and identify opportunities. True breakthroughs, however, require questioning assumptions and embracing uncertainty—domains where today’s algorithms predictably stall. Leaders who treat AI as a copilot, not an autopilot, will unlock the best results.

2. People’s opinions matter—a lot

In an age of data overload, trusted relationships matter more than ever. People change because of people—especially friends, family, and peers—not because of data alone. We rely on trusted others to signal which information deserves our attention. Leaders who cultivate psychological safety and invite open, candid exchange unlock the full power of human ingenuity.

Five uniquely human leadership superpowers

Empathy: AI can generate an “empathetic” response, but it lacks nuance—and people notice. Empathy voiced by AI often feels flat, inauthentic, and uninspiring. AI empathy may fool some of the people some of the time, but not for long. Sensing the unspoken fears and aspirations in a room remains a distinctly human strength.

Ethical judgment: Weighing moral tradeoffs in ambiguous situations—where data alone leads to brittle decisions—remains the realm of human decision-makers. AI lacks innate moral reasoning and may propose “solutions” that ignore ethical boundaries. Because these systems learn from historical data, they can perpetuate or even magnify unethical practices. For now, it is up to human leaders and developers to design and apply the right guardrails for AI.

Intuitive leaps: Human judgment remains critical for connecting disparate ideas into novel strategies for escaping the “local optimum” plateau that can trap algorithms. Humans are subject to cognitive biases, but we can learn to recognize and counteract bias in ways generative AI cannot.

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is meant to close this gap. Depending on whom you ask, AGI could be just around the corner or still a decade away. If and when it arrives, AGI may be able to innovate on its own. For now, however, AI is constrained to recombining what already exists. Of course, human innovation often does exactly that—as Sir Isaac Newton put it, by standing on the shoulders of giants—but not always.

Resilience: Rallying people through setbacks requires authentic vulnerability, not scripted responses. AI cannot compete with the “Ted Lasso effect”—knowing when to challenge, when to encourage, and when to buy them a pint. Humans have evolved to navigate complex social environments and form nuanced psychological, social, and organizational responses to adversity. AI has none of this lived experience.

Storytelling: AI‑generated stories can be engaging, but research shows they often lack the depth, authenticity, and relational impact of human‑crafted narratives. Readers report feeling less “transported” into AI‑generated story worlds than into human ones. (As an aside, the thought‑provoking novel Playground by Richard Powers takes on just this question.)

Leadership Actions

Use AI to free up people for high-touch work

Map your processes end to end and identify tasks AI can automate, such as reporting or initial triage. Done well, this can reclaim 20–30% of your team’s time for relationship‑building and creative problem‑solving. With automation, however, comes new risk. Use a project pre-mortem to address that risk: gather your team, assume your AI‑supported initiative has failed, and explore what could have caused it. Surface risks such as data bias or skill atrophy, then design safeguards like mandatory reviews or skill development.

Build in friction to reduce risk

MIT’s Renée Richardson Gosline warns against an overreliance on efficiency gains from AI without considering the long-term costs that may come from a “frictionless” environment. AI removes effort, but when things are too easy, we lose our capabilities in critical thinking and problem solving. This is what I call the Navi effect—as we increasingly rely on our car’s navigation to “get us there,” we may lose the ability to find the way home on our own. The antidote is to build in friction and deliberately design for thoughtful engagement and human oversight.

Train human–AI “hybrids” with ethical guardrails

Pair each team member with a tailored AI tool (for example, an analytics copilot or content generator) and train them explicitly on ethics and guardrails. Agree upfront on non-negotiable principles—such as transparent decision criteria and “do no harm”—and then test adherence through peer review of outcomes and processes.

Redesign incentives for synergy—and host AI free offsites

Measure and reward success on hybrid outcomes such as “insights actioned” or “team innovations launched,” with bonuses tied to thoughtful, collaborative use of AI. Schedule regular AI free offsites for unstructured idea jamming to foster intuitive leaps and deeper connection. Host “human edge” feedback sessions to recognize and celebrate non-AI contributions from team members.

The bottom line: Amplify, don’t automate

AI is poised to raise the bar for great leaders and their organizations. It can increasingly handle the “what” and the “how,” but people still own the “why” and the “so what.”

The real question is not whether AI will lead.
It is how you will lead people in a world shaped by AI.

Reflection questions

Which of my decisions demands irreplaceable human judgment?

How am I using AI to amplify, not dilute, my team’s strengths?

Where might over reliance on AI trap us in a local optimum.

Who can I rely on to help navigate AI’s ethical gray zones?

How do I create space for human intuition amid the data deluge?

References

“I, ChatGPT: Linguistic properties and human experiences of human- versus AI-generated stories.” (2025). Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-06341-2​

Andon, P. (2025, December 17). In praise of friction: Why the future of AI needs more resistance. BusinessThink, UNSW Business School. https://www.businessthink.unsw.edu.au/articles/ai-positive-friction-productivity-human-oversight

Ethical leadership in the age of AI: Challenges, opportunities and strategies. (2024). arXiv. https://arxiv.org/html/2410.18095v2​

Generative AI lacks the human creativity to achieve scientific discoveries. (2025). Scientific Reports. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-93794-9​

Harvard Business School. (2025). AI won’t make the call: Why human judgment still drives innovation. https://www.hbs.edu/bigs/artificial-intelligence-human-jugment-drives-innovation​

Human resilience in the AI era: What machines can’t replace. (2025). arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.25218​

Lawrence, N. D. (2024). The atomic human: Our place in the age of artificial intelligence. Cambridge University Press.

Marr, B. (2024, May 8). The important difference between generative AI and AGI. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2024/05/08/the-important-difference-between-generative-ai-and-agi/

McKinsey & Company. (2025, January 27). Superagency in the workplace: Empowering people to unlock AI’s full potential at work. McKinsey & Company.

Milotich, M. (2025). Breaking through the local optimum trap. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich. https://markmilotich.substack.com/p/breaking-through-the-local-optimum​

Milotich, M. (2025). Facts don’t move people—peers do. LeadingWell with Mark Milotich. https://markmilotich.substack.com/p/facts-dont-move-peoplepeers-do​

Rubin, M., et al. (2025). Comparing the value of perceived human versus AI-generated empathy. Nature Human Behaviour. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40588597/​

Seth, N. (2025). Human edge in the AI age: Eight timeless mantras for success. Bloomsbury Publishing. ​

Spiegelhalter, D. (2024). The art of uncertainty: How to navigate chance, ignorance, risk, and luck. Cambridge University Press.

The HOW Institute for Society. (2025). AI and ethical leadership. https://thehowinstitute.org/ai-and-ethical-leadership/

Every leader faces moments that feel like a roadblock, when a crisis threatens to halt progress. However, these moments often look quite different with the benefit of hindsight. When viewed from the right perspective, what feels overwhelming now can become a turning point—sparking growth, innovation, and renewed commitment. As Carol Dweck puts it, “The view you adopt profoundly affects how you lead your life.”

Resilience doesn’t mean denying difficult realities; it means actively choosing how to interpret them and deciding what to do next. The right interpretation can transform volatility from a threat into an invitation for enduring—and thriving—leadership over the long term.

Your Thinking Shapes Resilience

Mindset influences how you think, act, and shape outcomes. It can give you a strategic advantage—helping you persevere when others give up. Seeing setbacks as opportunities instead of permanent failures builds the mental flexibility needed to navigate uncertainty. For more, see “You Are What You Think.”

It Will All Work Out in the End

Setbacks are inevitable, but their impact depends on your response. When facing adversity, ask yourself, “How will this event look in a year or two?” For instance, stock market volatility may seem dramatic in the short-term, but steady, long-term growth—about 7% annually—is the real signal. Volatility matters mainly if you must sell now; otherwise, it is just noise, the importance of which fades over time.

Similarly, organizational challenges often become valuable learning moments when viewed through the long-term lens of vision and strategy. For example, the launch of a competitor’s product may push you to clarify the unique value you offer. For practical tips on regaining footing after difficult events, see “Bounce Back and Overcome Setbacks.”

The Choice Point: Pause, Notice, Choose

Choose to believe what is workable—the story that best allows you to act in alignment with your goals and values.

Every setback presents a choice point: the moment between what happens and how you respond. This pause lets you notice your automatic thoughts and consciously select your beliefs and reactions. Instead of falling into old patterns, resilient leaders use this moment to reframe their interpretations and choose responses that support their values and objectives. Watch “The Choice Point” to learn more about how to use the choice point to your advantage.

Learning and Psychological Safety

Beyond individual mindset, cultivating a culture of experimentation, learning, and psychological safety is essential. Leaders who foster safe environments where team members can take risks, share ideas, and admit mistakes without fear strengthen collective resilience. Such cultures convert bumps in the road into shared growth opportunities, lessen fear of failure, and help teams bounce back stronger—a quality Nassim Nicholas Taleb calls antifragile. See “Shake, Rattle and Roll—Volatility Will Make Your Team Stronger.”

Non‑Negotiable Truths: Leadership Guardrails

Not all beliefs are simply a matter of choice. When you are standing on a cliff, the belief in gravity is non‑negotiable—denying it could be fatal. Similarly, leaders face core truths like financial realities, ethical boundaries, and legal constraints that act as guardrails. Resilience involves finding workable perspectives within these boundaries, not ignoring them.

Action Steps for Resilient Leaders

When facing your next challenge, try these steps:

Separate the signal from the noise: Consider how this challenge will look two years from now if handled well.

Seize the choice point: Notice when you are about to react automatically and consciously choose your response.

Identify non-negotiables: Separate hard facts from interpretations.

Select workable beliefs: Choose the story that will allow you to act in alignment with your goals and values.

Act on your new perspective: Engage, experiment, and adjust.

Summary

Resilient leadership doesn’t avoid volatility; it uses setbacks as fuel for growth. Most obstacles, with time and perspective, become mere bumps in the road—reminding us that genuine progress comes from leading with choice, clarity, and courage. Embracing this mindset fosters persistence, creativity and flexibility—the key to better long-term results.

References

Brown, B. (2018). Dare to Lead: Brave Work. Tough Conversations. Whole Hearts. Random House.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.

Harris, R. (2022). The Happiness Trap: How to Stop Struggling and Start Living. Trumpeter Books.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment. Free Press.

Taleb, N. N. (2012). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. Random House.

In today’s volatile business environment, the greatest risk isn’t making the wrong choice—it’s settling for merely good enough. Organizations (and individuals) often mistake incremental success for optimal performance, locking onto strategies that deliver steady results but miss transformational opportunities.

This is the local optimum trap: reaching a performance peak that blinds us to much higher potential beyond. Our current position feels successful, alternatives seem risky or inferior, so we stop seeking breakthroughs.

Sometimes comfort masquerades as success. Adam Grant calls this “climbing Mount Stupid”—where our confidence peaks before we realize how much we don’t know. After our initial ascent, we may set up camp on our local performance peak. What was meant as a brief stopover becomes a permanent home.

Why Successful Companies Get Stuck

The Sunk Cost Fallacy

The most important thing to do if you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging.
—Warren Buffett

Leaders often cling to their chosen strategies and decisions. Having invested capital, brainpower, and organizational credibility, pivots may feel like failures—even when market signals demand change. This escalation of commitment undermines innovation and erodes competitive advantage.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect in the C-Suite

The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.
—William Shakespeare

Research by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger reveals a leadership blind spot: early success breeds overconfidence. Leaders who achieve initial wins may dismiss warning signs while they enjoy the view from the top of Mount Stupid. As complexity reveals itself, our confidence plummets. Unsure of our next steps, we may feel trapped in our current position. Only continuous learning and effort enable realistic assessment of capabilities, risks, and opportunities to improve decision-making.

Adapted from Grant (2023b).

Descending Mount Stupid

Here’s an inconvenient truth: progress often begins with letting go. Leadership isn’t about defending foothills but creating safety to explore and aim higher. Great leaders recognize when they’re stuck and have the courage to start anew.

Avoid getting stuck on Mount Stupid by:

• Questioning settled routines and successes
• Encouraging healthy dissent, even if disruptive
• Dropping unproductive habits and assumptions (See: Dropping Your Tools)

Leadership Action Plan

Immediate (This Quarter)

• Identify your three longest-standing strategic assumptions. What evidence do you have they are still valid?
• Conduct a “pre-mortem” assuming strategic failure. What caused it? What were the warning signs?
• Inventory resource-draining strategies, products, or processes that do not deliver proportional returns

Near-Term (Next Six Months)

• Create formal mechanisms like “sunset committees” empowered to end legacy initiatives
• Develop metrics rewarding strategic pivots, not just consistent execution

Medium-Term (This Year)

• Build leadership pipelines favoring adaptive, enterprise thinking
• Redesign incentives to prize breakthrough over incremental gains

The Bottom Line: Embrace an Abundance Mindset

Abundance stems from refusing to settle. Markets consistently create new value, and the highest returns come from seeking unexplored opportunities rather than protecting existing ones. Recognizing and escaping local optima is a critical strategic leadership skill.

Reflection Questions

What consistent results are masking suboptimal performance?

Which long-held beliefs no longer serve me—and how might I let them go?

How much time do I spend defending existing approaches versus exploring alternatives?

How do I reward or inadvertently punish strategic flexibility?

How am I creating space for doubt and curiosity for myself and my team?

What would a competitor with no legacy constraints do in our market?

What “mountains” are calling to me beyond current foothills?

References

Dunning, D., & Kruger, J. (1999). “Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.

Grant, A. (2023a). Think again: The power of knowing what you don’t know. Penguin Books.

Grant, A. (2023b). Overconfidence is a product of ignorance, not intelligence. LinkedIn.

Milotich, M. (2013). Dropping your tools: Letting go of non-productive habits. Claxus Consulting.

Startup House. (2024). Local optimum: Navigating the peaks and valleys of optimization.

In a data-driven world, it’s tempting to believe that providing rock‑solid facts will prompt people to change their attitudes and behaviors. But research tells a different story: people change because of people—especially peers, friends, and colleagues.

As James Clear observes: Facts don’t change behavior—friends do.

This is social contagion: the spread of attitudes, emotions, and behaviors through networks. Leaders who understand it can spark lasting change.

Understanding social contagion

• Simple contagion: Low-risk behaviors spread after single exposure. When a trusted colleague adopts a productivity app and recommends it, others try it immediately—especially when the perceived risk is low.
• Complex contagion: Big shifts—new values, workflows, or beliefs—need repeated reinforcement from multiple trusted peers. Change sticks only when people see broad, sustained support for the change, as well as an absence of significant downside risk.

Why peers drive business change

• Social reinforcement beats data. People watch peers more than statistics, seeking cues about what’s normal and worthwhile from friends and trusted colleagues.
• Resistance signals insufficient social proof. Your facts may be correct, but people are not looking for facts, they are looking for trust, confidence, and security. Complex changes need repeated encouragement from multiple influential network members.
• Culture beats compliance. Top-down enforcement through rules usually fails. Leaders must seek to cultivate peer-level advocates who champion desired attitudes and behaviors.

Social proof as strategy

Robert Cialdini’s research shows people adopt behaviors when they see others similar to themselves engaging in those behaviors. Observing respected peers signals the safety and correctness of their behavior. Leaders can leverage this by highlighting early adopters, sharing relatable success stories, and making results visible. Social proof works best within tight-knit groups. Phrases like “Most teams in our department now use this tool” create clear, actionable cues for others to follow.

How leaders harness social contagion

Recruit ambassadors: Identify well-connected, respected believers in your change. Their endorsement far outweighs communications from the CEO.

Create visible wins: Encourage early adopters to share stories in group settings. Avoid siloing change—foster observation and interaction across departments.

Enable peer influence: Pair people across teams for idea-sharing, shadowing, or show-and-tell sessions. Focus on authentic collaboration over formal presentations.

Monitor network health: Track connectors and informal leaders within your organization; their impact on culture outstrips official channels.

The takeaway

Leaders don’t just spread information—they engineer environments where social contagion works for them.

Reflection questions

To develop your capacity to stimulate change through social contagion, ask yourself:

• Who in my organization naturally influences others and could champion change?
• How am I creating spaces where positive behaviors are modeled and reinforced?
• What small wins can I celebrate publicly to build visible momentum?
• How am I encouraging cross-group interactions that build shared norms?
• How do I monitor informal networks to understand influence flow?
• How do I support influencers emotionally so their impact remains positive and sustainable?

References

Centola, D. (2018). How behavior spreads: The science of complex contagions. Princeton University Press.

Cialdini, R. B. (2021). Influence: The psychology of persuasion (New and expanded edition). Harper Business.

Clear, J. (2018). Atomic habits: An easy and proven way to build good habits and break bad ones: Tiny changes, remarkable results. Avery, an imprint of Penguin Random House.

Clear, J. (n.d.). Why facts don’t change our minds. James Clear. Retrieved August 13, 2025, from https://jamesclear.com/why-facts-dont-change-minds

Image: Getty Images

Our brains are wired for pattern recognition. It’s an evolutionary trait that helped our ancestors survive (rustling grass = possible lion). Our ancestors rarely came to harm through false positives (they thought it was a lion, and it wasn’t), whereas the price for failing to recognize a link was high. Better to err on the side of caution than become lunch.

Michael Shermer calls this patternicity—seeing correlations where none exist. In business, patternicity may lead to poor decisions based on faulty assumptions.

Andrea’s horse

Only 45% of U.S. university students got the right answer when working solo. But in teams, that rate jumped to 72%. Why? Collaboration helps break the illusion of false correlation—our tendency to link events that are unrelated.

Andrea bought and sold a horse twice and made a profit each time. The fact that it was the same horse is irrelevant. The events are independent.

The independence is easier to recognize in financial markets. Suppose you buy and sell a stock at a profit. Later, you buy the same stock at a higher price and sell it at a profit again. You didn’t lose money by paying more the second time—the second trade is independent from the first.

Stop this thought, I want to get off

False correlations interfere with rational decision making. In a famous example, the roulette wheel in a Monte Carlo casino landed on black twenty-six times in a row in 1913. Gamblers believed red was “due.” They bet heavily on red and lost millions, ignoring a basic fact: each spin of the roulette wheel is independent.

Correlation does not equal causation

Even when two metrics rise together, it doesn’t mean one caused the other. Take ice cream sales and shark attacks: both rise in summer, but eating gelato doesn’t summon sharks. Temperature is the hidden driver behind both.
Business parallel: when sales spike after a marketing campaign, this does not mean the campaign was responsible for the increase. Other factors could have played a role. Was there a competitor’s supply issue? Market tailwind? Or something else?

Mental shortcuts can mislead

Heuristics are useful cognitive shortcuts that save time—but risk warping decisions. Here are some common traps leaders fall into:

Anchoring bias: Over-reliance on initial data, forecasts, or opinions

Availability bias: Overestimating the impact of recent or dramatic events

Confirmation bias: Ignoring disconfirming evidence and doubling down on assumptions

As Daniel Kahneman notes in Thinking, Fast and Slow, heuristics boost speed—but often at the cost of accuracy. An over-reliance on mental shortcuts can lead to flawed risk assessments, misallocation of investments, erroneous decision-making, and decreased competitive advantage.

Recognizing when your intuition might be “overriding” objective scrutiny—and deliberately slowing down to test your assumptions against robust data—will help you mitigate cognitive traps and make better decisions.

Proactively avoid decision traps

Identify “trigger situations” when you’re most vulnerable to bias and apply appropriate countermeasures. Here are two trigger situations I have identified for myself, along with countermeasures:

Trigger: Decisions piled up on my desk at the end of the day

Countermeasure: Block morning time for complex decisions. Delay decisions if needed.

Trigger: Familiarity bias (“This person reminds me of…”)
Countermeasure: Make an extra effort to see the person with fresh eyes. Ask questions to actively test my assumptions about the person.

Cultivate smarter decision habits

Challenge your assumptions. Ask, “What else could explain this outcome?”
Run A/B tests: Especially for marketing or product tweaks

Use data tools: Run regression analysis to probe causality

Seek disconfirming evidence: Don’t just hunt for validation

Welcome diverse views: They expand your perspective—even if they’re uncomfortable

Review your decision-making process: Think about how you make decisions, especially when the outcome is unexpected or undesirable.

Reflection questions

• Have I linked unrelated events in recent decisions?
• What are my high-risk moments for cognitive shortcuts?
• Am I relying more on intuition or evidence in this decision?
• How can I test my assumptions?
• Who can I ask for a distinct perspective?

* The correct answer to Andrea’s horse puzzle is 2,000 € profit.

References

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Maier, N. R. F., & Solem, A. R. (1952). The contribution of a discussion leader to the quality of group thinking: The effective use of minority opinions. Human Relations, 5(3), 277–288.

Shermer, M. (2002). Why people believe weird things: Pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Shermer, M. (2008). Patternicity: Finding meaningful patterns in meaningless noise. Scientific American, 299(5), 48.

Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997). A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science, 275(5306), 1593–1599.

Images: CC0 Wikimedia Commons; CC0 Pxhere

In Mark Twain’s classic, Tom Sawyer convinces his friends to help him paint the fence—in fact, they beg Tom for the privilege of painting the fence—while he relaxes and eats an apple.

Tom uses several influence strategies to get his friends on board:

Increases perceived value. When his friend Ben asks if he likes the work, Tom replies, “Like it? Well, I don’t see why I oughtn’t to like it. Does a boy get a chance to whitewash a fence every day?”

Communicates scarcity. Tom turns away several would-be fence painters, implying that it’s a rare privilege. “I reckon there ain’t one boy in a thousand, maybe two thousand, that can do it the way it’s got to be done.”

Minimizes risk. By involving several people, Tom turns the chore into a fence-painting party, reducing the risk to an individual and increasing social inclusion. “He had had a nice, good, idle time all the while – plenty of company – and the fence had three coats of whitewash on it!”

Reduces the cost of pitching in. Tom offers to help Jim fetch water if Jim whitewashes some of the fence. This relieves Jim of having to do two jobs at once.

Frontispiece from the first edition of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, 1876

He had discovered a great law of human action, without knowing it—namely, that in order to make a man or a boy covet a thing, it is only necessary to make the thing difficult to attain. —Mark Twain

Motivation = Perceived Value – Risk – Cost

We all subconsciously calculate rewards, risks, and costs before we decide what to do. I call this the motivation equation.

Most people respond to value, risk, and effort triggers. We are primed to acquire what we perceive as valuable—especially when it is scarce (e.g., tickets to a sold-out concert). We try to reduce risk and uncertainty, and we prefer to expend less effort to get a job done.

But here’s the rub: Other people’s perception of value, risk, and effort are often different from ours. The “great offer” you make may not seem so great to the recipient, especially when they factor in risks and costs you may have overlooked.

Example: Motivating Mary

Suppose you want to motivate Mary to work on your project. The primary value you are offering is the opportunity for her to develop her skills and the potential for a bonus upon successful completion of the project. From your perspective, this looks like a great deal.

But what about Mary? What are the perceived risks from her perspective?

• How much management support does the project have?
• What is the reputation of the project manager?
• What if the skills I develop are not in demand?

Each of these risks reduces the value to Mary.

The costs to Mary of working on your project include:

• Learning new technology (extra hours and weekend study)
• Visiting customer sites (time away from family)

Mary mentally weighs the risks and costs before deciding whether to work on the project. This is done subconsciously. She may not know why her gut is telling her to reject your offer, but she does.

To get someone to do what you want, find ways to increase value, decrease risk, and/or reduce cost from their perspective.

Reflection questions

How can I increase perceived value for the other person? (e.g., put it in writing, make it exclusive, build a reputation for keeping commitments)

How can I reduce risk for the other person? (e.g., increase visible management support, introduce them to potential project team members)

How can I reduce cost for the other person? (e.g., provide relevant training and tools, connect them with an expert)

References

Dwyer, C. (1987). Graduate School of Education: Managing People. University of Pennsylvania.

Twain, M. (2018). The Adventures of Tom Sawyer: Original Illustrations. SeaWolf Press.

Images: pxhere.com; public domain

“Alea iacta est” (the die is cast) Julius Caesar is claimed to have said as he led his army across the Rubicon River in northern Italy in 49 BC, effectively declaring war against the forces of General Pompey. There was no turning back.

In a similar, though less dramatic way, we all cross a point of no return every time we decide to take action to achieve a goal. Until we cross our inner Rubicon, we are not committed to action, making it unlikely that we will take the steps necessary to achieve our goals.

The right attitude

One of the best ways to commit to action is to cultivate the right attitude. By attitude, I mean the way you think about and evaluate your attempts to achieve your goals. Attitude is a mental position, a posture, the way you see yourself interacting with and moving through the world.

A growth mindset, the belief that we can and will improve through effort, encourages us to persevere and try new approaches.

Goals that empower us to act share three characteristics

Approach

The goal is phrased in terms of what you want to do more of (approach) rather than what you want to stop doing (avoid). For example, “I will take a short break every hour” is more likely to motivate you than “I will stop pushing myself so hard.”

Research shows that simply thinking about a positive outcome increases your chances of achieving it. Spend time visualizing yourself accomplishing your goal. Better yet, write yourself a private “letter from the future” describing how you will feel when you succeed.

Control

The goal is within your control. This doesn’t mean that it won’t be challenging, but rather that you believe that with hard work it is possible to achieve the goal. A goal can only “stretch” so far before it breaks.

Setting SMART goals helps ensure that you are in control. SMART goals contain specific and measurable criteria that make it easier to know when you are on track and to take corrective action if you are not. If you are a team leader, a goal like “I will meet with each of my team members once a week” is more effective than “I will spend more time with my team.”

Positive

The goal is associated with positive emotions. Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio claims that we use our gut reactions to evaluate decision options. A goal that triggers a positive reaction makes you “light up” when you think about it. And you are more likely to take the action necessary to succeed.

Pay attention to your feelings and physical reactions when considering goals. Learn to trust your “gut” in areas of expertise. Your experience has given you a rich emotional memory that will help you make quick and accurate decisions. Gary Klein, a psychologist who studies decision making, found that expert firefighters use their gut reactions when deciding whether it is safe to enter a burning building.

Reflection questions

What are my attitudes towards success and failure? Do I expect / need / want to succeed? Do anything less than 100 percent is not good enough?

Where and how did I develop these attitudes? Do they help or hinder my development?

Are my goals framed as approach goals, i.e., something I want to do more of?

How do I feel when I imagine myself working towards and/ or achieving my goals?

What experiences can I draw on to activate my growth mindset? When have I been successful after putting in my 10,000 hours?

Who can I talk to about what enables them to act on their goals?

References

Dweck, C. (2016, January 13). What having a “growth mindset” actually means. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/01/what-having-a-growth-mindset-actually-means.

Moffitt, D. (2023, September 19). What is SMART Goals? 2023’s A How-To Guide. Kumospace. Retrieved from https://www.kumospace.com/blog/smart-goal.

Storch, M. (2004, December). Crossing your personal Rubicon. Scientific American. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/crossing-your-personal-ru/.

Image: Crossing the Rubicon. Jacob Abbott, 1849. Public Domain.