Intuition

 

The standard used to judge public knowledge in mathematics is proof. The standard used in science is experimental evidence that validates novel predictions. These are both highly respected standards. The legal system works on the standard of credible unbiased knowledge based on an adversarial system to convince a judge or a jury. In all these cases we are concerned with the truth arrived at by objectively verifiable means. “Intuition” is the subversive reality in this scheme of things. A very different category, more new age than science.

“You can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backward. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.” (-Steve Jobs)

What is intuition? The standard definition goes  – “the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning.” Intuition is subjective knowledge untethered by the more burdensome standards of public knowledge. But what is it? Let me try to define it operationally and maybe more narrowly – intuition is our ability to focus on what is relevant to our values. Intuition is the filter that chooses for our values.

Why is “focus on relevance” of such overwhelming importance? Our attention is bounded. We are constantly forced to pick out the few relevant features from an avalanche of input. Without the ability to filter out the infinite dust covering the few nuggets of relevant gold, we would be lost. Our limited attention spread thin and real signal lost in the noise of “chupchiks” (-Goldratt).

Equally important though is the connection intuition makes with our sense of value. We seem to reach our intuition based on what it would mean if it were true. What would it imply about our world? We judge it based on a deeper belief in how the world ought to be. Our intuition must be true in order for us to have consistency in our worldview and for the world to reflect some deeply held value.

In the last post I explored the use of filters and screens. It is possible for 90% accurate filters to be wrong 90% of the time in finding relevance when confronted by low probability events.  These “tail” events cannot be forecasted based on history. In most aspects of everyday life we are faced with unique situations with very little history to guide us. In these situations the decisive criteria in guiding our actions is our intuition tied more to our aspirations than to our history.

Intuition is constrained in two ways – by our assumptions about what is true objectively and by our belief in what the world ought to look like. Is it always possible to create harmony amongst our assumptions, and our values pursued personally and jointly? Or is it necessary to tolerate conflict. Eli Goldratt in his most philosophical musings embraced the idea of “Inherent Simplicity”, the harmonious nature of all reality. His belief that all conflicts between reality and our values can be resolved. A very courageous and passionate point of view but one he could legitimately embrace. His personal success in resolving many long standing chronic conflicts in managing Projects, Production, Supply Chains and other problems in business gave his claim credibility. This belief in “Inherent Simplicity” acts like an intuition pump. Forcing the examination of deeply held beliefs and assumptions and creating insights when they conflict with the values we are pursuing.

For example in projects, extensive experience suggests that most projects run late, run over budget and under-deliver on their promised rewards. The desired state is the exact opposite to finish projects faster, spend less and provide significant value. The common assumption in projects is that the high levels of uncertainty cause plans to fail. In other words there is not enough time and resources in the plans to accommodate for uncertainty. Eli challenged this notion and demonstrated that there was adequate time and resources but it was being wasted – in Parkinson’s law, in Student Syndrome and most importantly in multi-tasking. Correcting these behaviors (Critical Chain Project Management) resulted in dramatic acceleration in projects of the order of 25-50%. These successes though rely on a change in belief – do NOT measure tasks to due dates, aggregate the buffers and manage these to drive the right behaviors.

Here though is a problem. Changing assumptions and beliefs is not cost free. Typically their is a price to pay for expressing beliefs that challenge commonly accepted assumptions. If I express in full maturity a belief in Santa Claus I will pay a price, the price will be the merriment of my compatriots as they find a free source of humor. Are some beliefs more expensive than others – surely there are. In some cases the price I pay is in being ridiculed, in others, I could lose my standing, my job and occasionally my freedom.

Typically the beliefs that are more important and extract a greater price are those that challenge a commonly held societal or organizational norm. In order to make a change that is significant it is often these “organizational or societal norms” that have to be modified. This is the challenge of change. 

Intuition, not based on objective fact finding, instead tapping into our subjective ability to perceive importance and relevance is central to managing change. It creates an emotional connection to the future, based on articulation of what is important and why. This is the mode of thinking that shapes culture through story telling and focus on the softer aspects of value, quality and aesthetic. One of Eli Goldratt’s lasting contributions will be bringing to the table the recognition that “intuition is a valid basis for decision making in the management sciences” (- I paraphrase Eli Schragenheim). A subtle but immensely relevant contribution.

I also invite you to visit my blog on LinkedIn. Please also join me onFacebook and follow me on Twitter (@KapoorAjai)