In this series, we have discussed both human abilities and human nature. Today, I want to dive deeper into both.
Even though human nature has not changed appreciably over the last several hundred years, our understanding of it has increased dramatically.
In the article, “The Anatomy of a Test Question, Part 4”, we introduced the concept of System One and System Two thinking. This is from the book, “Thinking Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman. For the research that led to this book, Kahneman was awarded the 2002 Nobel Prize in economics. I recently searched “the most important nonfiction books of the 21st century” and found “Thinking Fast and Slow” in the top four. Add to this the broad applicability of the topic plus its lack of ideological messaging and I find myself recommending it without reservation. Read this book and you will find yourself seeing the world and yourself in a whole new light.
To review: System One thinking is subconscious, intuitive, habitual, and effortless. System Two thinking is conscious, intentional, calculating, and arduous. System One allows us to fill in the blanks when faced with incomplete information but also leads us to jump to conclusions. System Two allows us to take a breath, do the math, focus intentionally, and avoid mistakes.
System One allows us to react subconsciously to avoid a car that pulls out in front of us but also has us get off the elevator at the wrong floor through not paying attention.
System Two allows us to calculate our actual fuel economy but doesn’t have the bandwidth to respond instantly to a complex and perhaps questionable proposition where an answer is demanded now.
Speaking of bandwidth, neurosurgeon Allan J. Hamilton addresses that concept in his book “Cerebral Entanglements”. He suggests that just as an iceberg has a small percentage of its mass visible above the water line, your conscious System Two is a small percentage of your cognitive capabilities. His research has led him to believe that unlike the 90%-10% split below and above the surface on an iceberg, the System One and System Two bandwidth split is 99.998%-0.002%. This description rings true to anyone who has faced a gnarly diagnostic problem, set it aside until the next day, and wakes up in the middle of the night with a possible answer. Your System One is working in the background; really is subconscious, and really is effortless. I strongly recommend both books to my technician students and to my trainer students.
What does that have to do with a good tech being a good person? It is through the process of using System Two to train System One that expertise is developed. Anyone who is a technician can remember back to when they started; they were in over their head. The discomfort of not being confident about your job leads to a combination of distress and motivation. This is not only normal, it is necessary. What makes you a good technician is the willingness to face that reality honestly; to exercise a little humility, to invoke whatever ambition you can muster, and to develop the discipline to proceed against the tide of your own weakness and lack of expertise. This is why I mentioned earlier in this series that given the choice between the two, the manager should hire the candidate with the highest character over the candidate with the highest expertise. Character necessarily leads to expertise but not the reverse.
What makes all this possible is a trait that truly makes you different both from other primates and computers. Humans have the trait of self-awareness. They can detach and view themselves as an onlooker might. Through this they can evaluate their own as well as evaluate another person’s self-awareness and that other person’s self-evaluation, plus that other person’s evaluation of yourself. If this makes your head swim, join the crowd.
And now we finally come to the central point. All this self-awareness, honesty, humility, ambition, and discipline is not primarily a description of a person’s intellectual abilities. It is a description of a person’s moral character. Unfortunately, humans not only can self-evaluate. In addition to this strength, they have the following weakness: the tendency to self-justify. Any intellectual ability rests on underlying moral character, either good or bad. If good, that character leads to expertise and cooperation. If bad, that character limits technical expertise and promotes conflict with others in the shop as each tries to out-do the other in the game of self-justification. Behind this self-justification is tendency toward self-deception, another uniquely human trait. I suggest that the cure for all of this chaos involves a commitment to, and the development of, character.
Sometimes it only takes a single individual to set an example for a dysfunctional workplace to be transformed. Yes, it is better if that individual has responsibility and authority, but even a mid-level tech can start the ball rolling by being helpful, trustworthy, encouraging, and enthusiastic. Such things can be contagious.
In this respect we find agreement between the most secular and the most religious people. No one wants to work with someone they can’t trust. No one wants to work with someone who is lazy. No one wants to work with someone who is arrogant. No one wants to work with someone who is a prisoner of his own self-esteem. The flip side of that coin is its own complication. Becoming that helpful, trustworthy, ambitious, and humbly self-aware person isn’t always immediately welcomed by everyone in the shop. You have seen some employees accused of being a “goody two shoes”. “What, are you trying to make me look bad?”
But before that, it is costly for the individual to even try to do the right thing, both in time and effort. It is unfortunate that our culture has not cultivated such traits in young people over these last several decades. On the other hand, that doesn’t mean that an individual can’t develop on his own. I know a few people over the last several decades who just got tired of being “that guy” on their own. For most others it just takes mentoring, direction, and encouragement. The role of a mentor is one of the most difficult, important, meaningful, and rewarding positions that anyone can assume.
Over the next few articles, we will look at some specific traits and how to cultivate them in yourself and in others.
