Fast thinking relies on intuition, either performing fast analysis of avilable data or ignoring large amounts of data. Sometimes intuition is useful, but sometimes fast thinking is based on previous experiences and becomes a barrier to growth and change. Do you think people should rely more on intuition or decide slowly?
It is an interesting question. In general people need to be less impulsive, so I think that in general it is better decide slowly.
I concur that it is an interesting question. I think there is a third option to consider: we should evaluate our quick responses as to their long-term consequences, and then ensure that the former do not contradict our long-term goals. This may be done via behavioral training, via establishing favorable environmental conditions (such as social institutions), or via carefully choosing which situations to enter in the first place.
This is a great question. Have you heard of the "Kolbe Index Leadership Test"? It assesses how leaders tend to decide things - is it quickly, based on intuition, or rather systematically and based on data? My style, based on the leadership test, is the 'systematic' thinker. However, having said that, I see the value in deciding by intuition, especially in times of crisis when there is no time for debating.
Some people have a really strong sense of intuition - based on emotional intelligence - and their opinion can hold great value, depending on if others buy into it. I'd say that in general, deciding by intuition may not be the style that works best with teams, because it relies on one person's "feeling", and others do not "get" the rationale, because there may be no logical reason for that opinion, with it just being based on a personal feeling. Basing a decision on data and logical reasons is a more approachable way to get others' buy-in when working in teams.
As a leader, when intuition calls for deciding a certain way, if one wants the participation and buy-in of their team, and they have a strong intuition, they would need to find ways to rationalize their position. This is not always easy, especially if others offer a different, more readily logical approach.
All in all, intuition can definitely be insightful; however it can also pose limitations in terms of being accepted by team members.
Rachel Jacks, thank you for deep and descriptive input to the discussion and for mentioning a test, I will be sure to check it out. I agree that intuition is useful during crises when the time is of nessecity, but it is also a good point that followers may need the rationale for the decisions. It seems though that intuition will appear more in the situations dissuading from certain actions, issuing a so-called warning. And the limitation can be the communication with the team as you pointed out, or it can be fear of the unknown.
Joachim Lipski, thank you for your interest in the discussion. It seems that the third option still favors slow or systematic thinking. Looking for rationale, understanding the motivations behind gut feelings and especially carefully considering whether to enter the situation are characteristics of systematic thinking process. Still, analysing fast thinking in terms of slow thinking is always a good idea, to understand whether the person relies on emotion, past behavior or experience. Is "carefully choosing which situations to enter" means avoiding and ignoring the ones that are deemed to risky?
Mauricio Canales, thank you for sharing your opinion. I agree with you that slow thinking has more benefits for individuals and societies. However, people who do not think too long or do not consider the interests of others, often reach higher results, at least in short-term perspective. So, by prioritizing slow thinking it is possible to miss some opportunities. On the other hand, fast thinkers and risk takers face higher potential consequences.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Phytochemistry
- Extracts