• "Essentially what happens is they get so tired and emotionally drained that we even find that their immune system drops," Iyengar said. "They even more likely to get a cold, to get a flu."
• Janis suggested that Groupthink happens when there is:
  • A strong, persuasive group leader.
  • A high level of group cohesion.
  • Intense pressure from the outside to make a good decision.
• What he found was that a lack of conflict or opposing viewpoints led to poor decisions, because alternatives were not fully analyzed, and because groups did not gather enough information to make an informed decision.
• Good decisions are not made based on luck, and it is not impossible to think of a good solution and open your mind.
• Challenge assumptions rather than buying into them-
• Generate reasonable alternatives
  • The more hazy our vision, the further we perceive it to be.
• Of course, our own experience will come back to us but it doesn't mean we have to make a decision based on it
• a dramatic or traumatic experience in your own life can distort your thinking
• Don't believe the initial proposal of what others opinions may be (don't give away too much of your own preconceptions because they may absorb this and relate it back to you because we can get anchored by initial ideas), always view other perspectives on what is right (you could approach friends engaged in different kind of work, your spouse, a nine-year old child, customers, suppliers, senior citizens, someone from a different culture; in essence anyone who might see things differently)
• Confirmation bias, always consider conflicting information
• Always check to see whether you are examining all the evidence with equal rigor. Avoid the tendency to accept confirming evidence without question.
• Get someone you respect to play devil’s advocate, to argue against the decision you’re contemplating. Better yet, build the counterarguments yourself. What’s the strongest reason to do something else? The second strongest reason? The third? Consider the position with an open mind.
• Be honest with yourself about your motives. Are you really gathering information to help you make a smart choice, or are you just looking for evidence confirming what you think you’d like to do?
• if you think of the losses you may have it will make your mind more close-minded to possibilities
• let people accuse and don't take the blame. let people question you and find it difficult to explain your behaviour.
• To reduce the effects of overconfidence in making estimates, always start by considering the extremes, the low and high ends of the possible range of values. This will help you avoid being anchored by an initial estimate. Then challenge your estimates of the extremes. Try to imagine circumstances where the actual figure would fall below your low or above your high, and adjust your range accordingly. Challenge the estimates of your subordinates and advisers in a similar fashion. They’re also susceptible to overconfidence.
• To avoid the prudence trap, always state your estimates honestly and explain to anyone who will be using them that they have not been adjusted. Emphasize the need for honest input to anyone who will be supplying you with estimates. Test estimates over a reasonable range to assess their impact. Take a second look at the more sensitive estimates.
• Get statistics, try not to be guided by impressions. To minimize the distortion caused by variations in recallability (based on experience), carefully examine all your assumptions to ensure they’re not unduly influenced by your memory.
• Forewarned Is Forearmed

When it comes to business decisions, there’s rarely such a thing as a no-brainer. Our brains are always at work, sometimes, unfortunately, in ways that hinder rather than help us. At every stage of the decision-making process, misperceptions, biases, and other tricks of the mind can influence the choices we make. Highly complex and important decisions are the most prone to distortion because they tend to involve the most assumptions, the most estimates, and the most inputs from the most people. The higher the stakes, the higher the risk of being caught in a psychological trap.

The traps we’ve reviewed can all work in isolation. But, even more dangerous, they can work in concert, amplifying one another. A dramatic first impression might anchor our thinking, and then we might selectively seek out confirming evidence to justify our initial inclination. We make a hasty decision, and that decision establishes a new status quo. As our sunk costs mount, we become trapped, unable to find a propitious time to seek out a new and possibly better course. The psychological miscues cascade, making it harder and harder to choose wisely.

As we said at the outset, the best protection against all psychological traps—in isolation or in combination—is awareness. Forewarned is forearmed. Even if you can’t eradicate the distortions ingrained into the way your mind works, you can build tests and disciplines into your decision-making process that can uncover errors in thinking before they become errors in judgment. And taking action to understand and avoid psychological traps can have the added benefit of increasing your confidence in the choices you make.

• notice what you discover, don't worry about what you appreciate, and wish were different
• respect the company if you had a dream about it, the dream would have to be agreed by everyone.
• Ask questions such as "What really happens next in the process?" and "Does a decision need to be made before the next step?" or “What approvals are required before moving on to the next task?"
• Flow charts, keep things flowing. Most flow charts are made up of three main types of symbol:
  • Elongated circles, which signify the start or end of a process;
  • Rectangles, which show instructions or actions; and
  • Diamonds, which show decisions that must be made
• When you brainstorm on your own, you'll tend to produce a wider range of ideas than with group brainstorming – you do not have to worry about other people's egos or opinions, and can therefore be more freely creative. Think crazy and let there be no criticism of ideas: You are trying to open up possibilities and break down wrong assumptions about the limits of the problem.
• Ensure that no one criticizes or evaluates ideas during the group session. Criticism introduces an element of risk for group members when putting forward an idea. This stifles creativity and cripples the free running nature of a good brainstorming session.
• Ensure that no train of thought is followed for too long. Make sure that you generate a sufficient number of different ideas, as well as exploring individual ideas in detail.
• Introductory Ice Breakers:

Introductory ice breakers are used to introduce participants to each other and to facilitate conversation amongst the participants.

• The Little Known Fact: Ask participants to share their name, department or role in the organization, length of service, and one little known fact about themselves.

Look for the humanizing factor in others of different status, a little known fact about them.

• The best approach to brainstorming combines individual and group brainstorming. Group brainstorming needs formal rules for it to work smoothly.
• Appreciation is a very simple but powerful technique for extracting the maximum amount of information from a simple fact.
• risk of some kind: (probability of it occurring and cost of it occurring) customer habits change, new competitors appear, factors outside your control could delay your project.
• The risks- someone saying something that may not even be directed to me but i will probably take sensitively
• Your goal- ignore it and do my own thing
• Your plan (within time span) within a minute- keep doing what i want
• Consider consequences, risks, feasibility.
• Decision tree when deciding what to buy/do/see/whatever - http://www.mindtools.com/dectree.html
• theming

http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_86.htm

• # Take on more responsibilities?
• # Specialize more in a specific product or market?
• # Change the way you communicate with others?
• # Get/Change incentives
• big picture - http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_09.htm
• mind maps- http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newISS_01.htm
  • S - Substitute - components, materials, people
  • C - Combine - mix, combine with other assemblies or services, integrate
  • A - Adapt - alter, change function, use part of another element
  • M - Modify - increase or reduce in scale, change shape, modify attributes (e.g. colour)
  • P - Put to another use
  • E - Eliminate - remove elements, simplify, reduce to core functionality
  • R - Reverse - turn inside out or upside down, also use of Reversal.
• Provocation:
• We begin by making deliberately stupid statements
• Once you have made the Provocation, you can use it in a number of different ways, by examining:
  • The consequences of the statement
  • What the benefits would be
  • What special circumstances would make it a sensible solution
  • The principles needed to support it and make it work
  • How it would work moment-to-moment
  • What would happen if a sequence of events was changed
  • Etc.
• Action plans become memory assistance plans one they are successful. They are similar but not the same as everyone else in solving a common problem.
• Action plans involve keep changing things until you get better, to not give up.
• TRIZ: to image the ideal solution first, and

to solve contradictions. TRIZ recognizes two categories of contradictions:

• 1. Technical contradictions are classical engineering "trade-offs." The desired state can't be reached because something else in the system prevents it. In other words, when something gets better, something else automatically gets worse. Classical examples include:
  • The product gets stronger (good), but the weight increases (bad).
  • Service is customized to each customer (good), but the service delivery system gets complicated (bad).
  • Training is comprehensive (good), but keeps employees away from their assignments (bad).
• 2. Physical contradictions, also called "inherent" contradictions, are situations in which an object or system suffers contradictory, opposite requirements. Everyday examples abound:
  • Software should be complex (to have many features), but should be simple (to be easy to learn).
  • Coffee should be hot for enjoyable drinking, but cold to prevent burning the customer
  • Training should take a long time (to be thorough), but not take any time.
• the problem of escalation of commitment -- the tendency for decision makers to persist with failing courses of action. Contrary to the rational choice assumption that decision making reflects incremental costs, consideration of sunk costs often leads actors to aim for higher goals as a means to recoup past losses
• ladder of inference involves reflection, advocacy and research of other people's experience to ensure you are making the right decision. http://www.systems-thinking.org/loi/loi.html
• blind spots that we often label as communication issues, team dynamics, management style, and cultural and organizational biases. clearing those blind spots by empowering the team to help each other and owning your enterprise (maintaining your energy).
• don't give psychological or physical health advice.
• http://www.dumblittleman.com/2010/07/5-key-steps-that-will-improve-your.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DumbLittleMan+%28Dumb+Little+Man+-+tips+for+life%29&utm_content=Twitter
• fail to consider some aspects when making a decision- reconsider- having an opinion (a positive view of what may be right in your own opinion)
• don't just stare and listen, think for yourself, don't wait for the answer :)