You always thought he was a good guy. You've chatted with Jack, your senior manager, at company parties, attended numerous meetings with him, and talked privately in his office in recent weeks to discuss a new initiative you've been spear-heading. Today he made the announcement: the company is pulling the plug on your project. Naturally, you're disappointed. But how do you feel about Jack?
If you're like many people, you're thinking, "Now I see his true colors. All of his encouragement must have been insincere. When push comes to shove, Jack is just like the rest of the higher-ups: phony, risk-averse, and visionless."
Or is he? This scenario illustrates one of our deep-seated, and largely invisible, biases. We tend to attribute others' behavior to fixed personality traits (i.e. "phony", "risk-averse"), rather than considering behavior within the constraints of a situation. For example, basketball players who are made to shoot in a poorly lit gymnasium may be judged as less talented than those who are observed playing under excellent lighting. We quickly blame the player, rather than taking stock of temporary limitations. Even when we're aware of the outside pressures people face, we often continue to see behavior as a reflection of enduring qualities. We just can't help ourselves.
This phenomenon, called the "fundamental attribution error" or "correspondence bias", was observed 45 years ago in a psychological experiment by Ned Jones and Victor Harris, and has intrigued social psychologists ever since. In the words of Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert, "...in everyday life people seem all too willing to take each other at face value and all too reluctant to search for alternative explanations for each other's behavior."
If you're like many people, you're thinking, "Now I see his true colors. All of his encouragement must have been insincere. When push comes to shove, Jack is just like the rest of the higher-ups: phony, risk-averse, and visionless."
Or is he? This scenario illustrates one of our deep-seated, and largely invisible, biases. We tend to attribute others' behavior to fixed personality traits (i.e. "phony", "risk-averse"), rather than considering behavior within the constraints of a situation. For example, basketball players who are made to shoot in a poorly lit gymnasium may be judged as less talented than those who are observed playing under excellent lighting. We quickly blame the player, rather than taking stock of temporary limitations. Even when we're aware of the outside pressures people face, we often continue to see behavior as a reflection of enduring qualities. We just can't help ourselves.
This phenomenon, called the "fundamental attribution error" or "correspondence bias", was observed 45 years ago in a psychological experiment by Ned Jones and Victor Harris, and has intrigued social psychologists ever since. In the words of Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert, "...in everyday life people seem all too willing to take each other at face value and all too reluctant to search for alternative explanations for each other's behavior."
- From a HBR blog
No comments:
Post a Comment