Excerpts from the “Intelligence Trap” book

The first step [to evaluating a claim] is to learn to ask the right questions:

• Who is making the claim? What are their credentials? And what might be their motives to make me think this?
• What are the premises of the claim? And how might they be flawed?
• What are my own initial assumptions? And how might they be flawed?
• What are the alternative explanations for their claim?
• What is the evidence? And how does it compare to the alternative explanation?
• What further information do you need before you can make a judgment?

……….

Refining these findings to a set of core characteristics, Karl Weick and Kathleen Sutcliffe have shown that high-reliability organizations all demonstrate:

• Preoccupation with failure: The organization does not become complacent with success, and workers assume “each day will be a bad day.” The organization rewards employees for self-reporting errors.
• Reluctance to simplify interpretations: Employees are rewarded for questioning assumptions and for being skeptical of received wisdom. At Deepwater Horizon, for instance, more engineers and managers may have raised concerns about the poor quality of the cement and asked for further tests.
• Sensitivity to operations: Team members continue to communicate and interact, to update their understanding of the situation at hand and search for the root causes of anomalies. On Deepwater Horizon, the rig staff should have been more curious about the anomalous pressure tests, rather than accepting the first explanation.
• Commitment to resilience: Building the necessary knowledge and resources to bounce back after error occurs, including regular “pre-mortems” and regular discussions of near misses. Long before the Deepwater Horizon explosion, BP might have examined the underlying organizational factors leading to previous, less serious accidents, and ensured all team members were adequately prepared to deal with a blowout.
• Deference to expertise: This relates to the importance of communication between ranks of the hierarchy, and the intellectual humility of those at the top. Executives need to trust the people on the ground. Toyota and NASA, for instance, both failed to heed the concerns of engineers; similarly, after the Deepwater Horizon explosion, the media reported that workers at BP had been scared of raising concerns in case they would be fired.

……….

Nine “master virtues” that the IVA [Intellectual Virtues Academy] considers to be crucial for good thinking and learning, with accompanying slogans. They are divided into three categories:

Getting started

• Curiosity: a disposition to wonder, ponder, and ask why. A thirst for understanding and a desire to explore.
• Intellectual humility: a willingness to own up to one’s intellectual limitations and mistakes, unconcerned with intellectual status or prestige.
• Intellectual autonomy: a capacity for active, self-directed thinking. An ability to think and reason for oneself.

Executing well

• Attentiveness: a readiness to be “personally present” in the learning process. Keeps distractions at bay. Strives to be mindful and engaged.
• Intellectual carefulness: a disposition to notice and avoid intellectual pitfalls and mistakes. Strives for accuracy.
• Intellectual thoroughness: a disposition to seek and provide explanations. Unsatisfied with mere appearances or easy answers. Probes for deeper meaning and understanding.

Handling challenges

• Open-mindedness: an ability to think outside the box. Gives a fair and honest hearing to competing perspectives.
• Intellectual courage: a readiness to persist in thinking or communicating in the face of fear, including fear of embarrassment or failure.
• Intellectual tenacity: a willingness to embrace intellectual challenge and struggle. Keeps its “eyes on the prize” and doesn’t give up.

Source: The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Stupid Mistakes (2021) by David Robson.