The Most Important Task, MIT

This is the last text for this year. I will be back in the second week next year.

The Most Important task is not an important mental model, but it helps you to simplify your life. As you can see from the title, the Most Important Task is in a singular form, not plural. Zero is the simplest number, but you have to think the next simplest figure, one. One way to separate yourself from others is to have a perfect focus on the most important task. To say ”yes” to this task, you have to say ”no” to tens of others. This task has to be your top priority. The most important task can have different timescales. Your daily choices can be done for achieving your most important long-term task or goal.

Whatever you think is your Most Important Task, you need define it some way. And you need to understand why you have to do it. No task can be the most important without the reason. The reason can be something like, ”Without doing a task x, nothing else gets done” or ”By doing a task y everything else will be easier or unnecessary” Sometimes this task has to be put into separate tasks. Then, you have to define the priorities of these smaller tasks. You have your most productive hours of the day. Different people have different hours. Normally, these hours are from two to four hours after you wake up. You need some time to recover from your sleep in order to be productive. My most productive hours are somewhere from three to five hours after I wake up. You can do small experiments to figure out your own.

Be ruthless in focusing on the most important task. Do not let anything or anyone interfere with doing it. Close your e-mail notifications, put your smartphone on silent mode and educate everyone around you to leave you alone during this task. This is probably easier said than done. And it will take some time. Showing the improved results of your working days is maybe the only smart way to do it. Forget everything else until you get this task done. I recommend to put a deadline to it, because you cannot be productive the whole day every day for a long time. Other hours you can use for less important things like governance. You can define the most important task for a longer time frame than one day. If you do this, add these moments into your calendar. Future is hard to forecast. Therefore, I don´t recommend this. Timeframe have to specific in order to get things done.

To get the most important task done, you have to define the first physical microtask. It is harder to begin without defining it. For example, you have a toothache that makes your life miserable. Then, the most important task for you is to reserve an appointment with a dentist. The first physical task is to find a phone number for the dentist or find a good dentist from the internet. The definition of the right result is filling the cavity and the getting rid off the toothache. You can also define all the other physical and mental microtasks if you think it is necessary. You can also create a system or systems for getting this task done.

If you have originally thought something different for the most important task, change it when something else changes your priorities. In an ideal situation, the most important task is the same task every day. For example, most often, the most important task for me is to learn new things about the most useful mental models. It can be hard to believe, because I write and publish texts once a week. My priority is to understand the models and how to build a latticework around them. Writing more is not important now. Priorities can change in the future.

I want to wish everybody happy holidays! Remember to take some time to recover!

-TT

Confirmation bias

Last week I wrote about one type of excessive self regard, loss aversion. This week I continue with a different theme related to excessive self-regard, confirmation bias. When you start looking for information that matches your former beliefs and reject the information that doesn´t confirm it, you can suffer from confirmation bias. This happens, when this leads you to a wrong conclusion. For example, you can start looking for evidence against climate change, instead of looking for evidence for it. The more ego, time or effort you have invested in your prior beliefs, the more likely you will suffer from confirmation bias. It doesn´t mean you are always wrong, but the likelihood will increase.

Ideology is the worst source of confirmation bias

Ideology is the worst source of confirmation bias. It creates the worst kind of mistakes. Any ”ism” is bad for you with large doses. It doesn´t matter whether you have a blind faith in capitalism, socialism, environmentalism, or any other ism, you probably suffer from confirmation bias. When you suffer from ideology, you create a self-reinforcing feedback loop in which all the information you seek, all the people you meet, and all the decisions you take, strengthen your beliefs. After this goes for a while, you have created a bubble for yourself where you cannot see any good in anything that is against your beliefs. After this feedback loop has worked for years, you become delusional. If this goes too far, it happens to anyone. No matter what you believe in.

Track records, and trying to destroy your best ideas are best antidotes

Lets face it. Any track record that is long enough is a better way to see how things are than any belief you can have about your skills and abilities. For example, if you are a bad investor and have a track record of losses in the last ten years, you shouldn´t believe you are a great in investing. Also 90 per cent of Swedish drives believed that they were better than average drivers. It is easy to understand that some of them are wrong. Instead of believing it, they should focus on how many accidents or near misses they have had. Poor performance leaves clues. No matter whether they are losses in financial markets or accidents while driving, long term results are the best predictor of future success. Do not believe in short term results. They don´t tell enough to you.

Peer reviews are used in many scientific disciplines to evaluate the quality of research. However, it creates possibilities of confirmation biases effecting on the results. Reviewers are people who are likely to suffer the confirmation bias of their own if they are wrong. They have probably done the same research in a bit different way and are getting the same results. If peer reviews do not align with track records of reality, believing in the latter option is the best option. For example, efficient market theory has affected on financial market research for decades. But mathematical results of the reality of the markets do not confirm it. Still, many business schools teach students efficient market theory for their students. Without going into details, the probabilities that efficient market theory gives to extreme daily fluctuations of the markets are much smaller than what has happened in the markets.

Try to create a habit for destroying your best and most important ideas. It helps you to focus on the right ideas. For you to do this, search for the smartest possible people who don´t believe you are right. This is quite easy in modern world. Then figure out why they believe in their own conclusions. You can also stay close to people who are willing to give you contrarian opinions, when they think you are wrong. People who are more willing to get to the truth than being right. You can also share your best and most important ideas to your enemies. When they are willing to explain what you did wrong or why they disagree, you can understand your ideas much better. Today, it is easy to tell the public what you think. I recommend you to do that.

This is all for now. Until next week,

-TT

Loss aversion

Loss aversion is a form of an excessive self-regard. It is a tendency to prefer avoiding losses compared to getting equivalent gains. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman has developed this concept with Amos Tversky. Like many other psychological heuristics and biases, loss aversion can be misunderstood and used for your own good or bad.

Two forms of loss aversion

First case goes like this: Imagine a situation that you are offered a bet in which you have 50 per cent chance of winning 110$ or 50 per cent of losing 100$. Would you take this bet? According to Kahneman, most people wouldn´t take the bet. Imagine another bet in which you have a 100 per cent chance of losing 90$ or 90 per cent chance of losing 100$? Would you take the first or second bet? According to Kahneman and other researchers, most people would take the last bet. As you can see from these bets, first situation has the same probability of winning 55$ and losing 50$ and in the second situation, both bets have an expected value of losing 90$.

What this means is that in the first situation people were loss averse. They didn´t want to risk their 100$, even though they had a better chance of winning 110$. In the second situation people were willing to risk more money to get even. This can be seen as irrational behavior, at least according to Kahneman. But it is not that simple. As with everything in life, in reality, it depends on the situation. The behavior in the first situation is irrational only if your 100$ is not needed by you. It comes to path dependence. If you lose your money you won´t get a chance to get them back. You have lost your money and you cannot buy bread and butter. Path dependence is the same fact whatever the sum of money. You just cannot afford to have a chance to lose money you will need later. This doesn´t mean you shouldn´t take 100 bets that are similar to the first situation if you can afford to lose the money.

Second situation is different. You take more risks for not to lose, instead of accepting losses, you are more likely to risk more capital to gain what you have already lost. This makes you more vulnerable to get hurt in the long run in many ways. For example, you lose some of your money in investing a stock x, when it announces bad financial report. You are more likely to invest more money for this stock to gain your losses back than putting your money to stock y that has risen in the same time after a good financial report to get them back. Throwing good money after bad money will more likely to be a bad decision. This doesn´t mean it is always a bad decision. It is only a more probable effect. When you do this kind of mistake, you are more likely to lie to yourself about it. Instead of admitting failure by taking responsibility about your mistake, you might explain it with bad luck, or mistakes from other people, etc.

Loss protecting products and services

The providers of financial products and services use loss aversion for their advantage. Insurance is one type of products that takes loss aversion for service provider´s advantage. When you insure your fortune to protect yourself against losses, you pay the price for it. Insurance selling companies have large databases of their customers and the likelihood of getting into accidents. They know the probabilities of these accidents. And they price their insurances in a way that the value of your expected loss is smaller than the price of their expected gain from the insurance. As with the first type of loss aversion, you have to buy the insurance if you cannot afford the cost of the accident. Financial industry is also willing to sell you products that have capital protection. There is always price to pay. It can be something like a decreasing possibility for gaining capital or a bigger commission for buying the product. Whatever it is, it is not a free lunch. You have to pay for it. Be aware of anyone you tells gives you a guarantee that you cannot lose without having costs. He is not telling the whole truth about the product.

Until next week!

-TT

Upholders, Questioners, Obligers and Rebels

When I introduced a mental model of motivation, I wrote about three sources of motivation, intrinsic, extrinsic and altruistic motivation. This time I will get introduce four different tendencies concerning on the intrinsic and extrinsic sources of motivation. Gretchen Rubin has introduced four different personalities that react differently for two different sources of motivation:

• Upholders meet outer and inner expectations
• Questioners resist outer expectations and meet inner expectations
• Obligers meet outer expectations and resist inner expectations
• Rebels resist both inner and outer expectations

According to Rubin, these personalities don´t change during lifetime, unless something really devastating happens. For example, a loss of a loved one, or a near-death experience. It doesn´t mean that all the behavior is the same as the personality describes. Everyone has a basic personality and similarities with two other ones. For example, Upholders have similarities with Questioners and Obligers. Usually, similarities are stronger with one personality. For example, Upholders have more similarities with either Questioners or Obligers. In this text, I provide a short description of these four personalities

Upholders

Upholders can be described as law abiding citizens and self-targeting missiles. They want to meet both the outer and inner expectations alike. They tend to love rules, to-do lists, minute-by-minute schedules, repetitive tasks, and deadlines. When they make a decision, they will follow through. All the expectations make them feel free and motivated. They may feel hurt or impatient when others reject expectations, cannot determine rules for themselves or question their expectations. They do not adapt well with sudden changes. They need clarity to meet their inner expectations. Upholders are eager to understand and meet expectations thorough, reliable, can seem humorless, and are demanding.

Dealing with Upholders is many ways easy. They do what they say, do it on time, they don´t need any extra requests to do something, and they are self-motivated. They get energized when they get things done. They manage their own businesses and customer relations well. They tend to thrive with situations that have clear rules, routines, changes are small and slow, and take initiatives without supervision. They have problems with delegation, because they think others are not dependable enough.

Questioners

Questioners can be described as exhaustive researchers and justification-seekers. They focus on inner expectations. They question everything They need to find reasons why something is done. If they are good enough, outer expectations transform to inner expectations. They want to be logical and efficient. They prefer gathering their own facts and make their own decisions based on them. They can suffer from analysis-paralysis. They are paradoxical, because they don´t like to answer questions from others about their judgments. They think it is not necessary to explain anything they have thought through, because they have done it with care. They are interested in creating more efficient systems, inner-directed, impatient with others´ complacency, and have a crackpot potential.

Dealing with a questioner requires patience for their endless questions. They can add value by finding reasons for doing or not doing something that others find justified without thinking. You may think they are difficult with all their questions. You have to remember that they do it because they want efficient actions and smart decisions. You have to put them deadlines and restrictions for their research. Do not put them on a situation where there is a possibility of doing endless research when it isn´t needed. Put them on environment that rewards and encourages research. And don´t let them work with people who have low tolerance for questions.

Obligers

Obligers can be described as people-pleasers. They focus on outer expectations. Real issue is that they need external accountability. They cannot meet their inner expectations without external accountability. They work well in an environment with external accountability. If the environment changes in a way that external accountability disappears, they become clueless and paralyzed. When they can match their own inner expectations with their outer expectations, they get the life they want. They are great leaders, family and community members, and friends. They have a tendency for overworking and burnout and they have trouble saying no.

You can team up them with a coach, accountability partner, personal organizer and any other professional. Face-to-face interactions work best with them. Accountability works better when they get positive feedback. Sometimes negative feedback, taking them for granted, too ambitious demands for them, nagging, or exploiting them can initiate a rebellion. This can happen fast and without warning. They excel at meeting other people´s deadlines and like monitoring and supervision from others when they feel they are treated fairly.

Rebels

There is no better word to describe a Rebel. They focus on resisting inner and outer expectations alike. They care about freedom and self-expression. They resist all types of control, even self-control. The harder you push them, the harder the resistance. Ability to choose is the most important thing. They enjoy meeting challenges in their own way. They can do almost anything they want to if the choice is theirs. When they are on a mission, they have no need for checklists, routines or supervision. But they don´t work well with requests. Even reasonable requests can have a negative reaction. Rebels are independent-minded, can think outside the box, spontaneous, sometimes inconsiderate, and struggle with routines.

When you deal with a Rebel, remember that you get their best response by using information-consequences-choice sequence. You have to give them all the information they need, tell them the consequences of actions, and allow their decision without lecturing. Do not let them out of trouble, when they make a wrong decision. If they don´t suffer the consequences, you give them no reason to act. Rebels are quite easily manipulated by using their contrarian nature against them. They also respond better when you use words like choice, freedom, and self-expression, instead of using words like responsibility, necessity, or rules.

I am not sure how scientific this division of four personality types Rubin has created, but it makes sense to me. I am a questioner with a tendency to rebel against rules. At least, that is what I think of myself.

Until next week,

-TT

Strategy

Definitions

Strategy has so many definitions you could write a book about them. Here are couple of them: ”A plan of action designed to achieve a long term or overall aim.” or ”A general plan or set of plans intended to achieve something over a long period of time.”

Strategy for individuals

I focus on strategy for individuals in this text. Strategy is applied in many organisations. Military strategy, business strategy, and corporate strategy are the most common applications. You can create a strategy for life or for some aspect of life. For example, you can create an investment strategy or a strategy for being the best you can be. You can create a set of principles that you use to guide your actions, thought processes, and decision-making to achieve a long term aim. These principles are your framework. Do not confuse strategy and tactics. Strategy is a common framework for achieving what you want. Tactics are the individual tools you use to make strategy happen.

Past and present

Even though strategy focuses on the future, your past has an effect on it. The knowledge, skills and talents you have today were created in the past. You also have to understand where you are now and to understand how you can get in a position in which you want to be in the future. You cannot create a strategy to get there without understanding your past and your present situation. You depend on them when you are defining the position you want to be in.

First, you need to know where you are right now. You need to know your knowledge, skills and talents and other assets you have like your relationships and finances. You have to understand what is unique about them. You also need to know what you don´t know, what you cannot do, and what is hard or impossible for you to accomplish. You have to find out brutal facts and separate them from your beliefs. You cannot figure all these things yourself. You need help. Ask your unbiased friends or have yourself tested. Consult professionals. When you know where you are, you can find the best opportunities to get where you want to be. And you can also see obstacles to get there.

If your strategy has an effect on other people, consult them about it. There are some things that you can figure out only by yourself. For example, what things make you feel great? What things make you feel weak? For example, I feel great when I can figure out how things are connected and feel weak when I have to communicate with the people I don´t like or know well. Nobody can tell you these things.

Remember that some of these things change. You are not the same person five years from now. Be prepared for changes. After you have figured out all the facts about things mentioned before, you can start designing a strategy for the future. You start with strategic vision and compress it to your strategic intent. Then you figure out your strategic objectives to accomplish your intent. Finally, you start executing your strategy.

Future

Your strategic vision tells you about where you want to be and when. You have to think what you can accomplish in the future, is it worth the effort, and it tells you what you want to accomplish and why you want to do it. It also tells you when you when you want all these things to happen. You make a vision for future that is many years from the date you finish it. Your strategic vision have to answer three sets of questions. First, what is the valuable and unique position you want to be in and what this position means to you and all the people it has an effect on. Second, what are the benefits you can offer them? What is the difference between these benefits and benefits your competitors offer to them? Third, what are your guiding values for achieving your unique position?

When you are done with your strategic vision, you have to compress it to strategic intent. Your stratetic intent has to be short and concise compared to your strategic vision. All the people who has to deal with it has to be behind it. It doesn´t matter whether they are your colleagues at work or your family. The best time span for it is from three to five years. It has to be challenging and visionary. A simple example of strategic intent is ”I want to be number one in X in region Y five years from now!”

After you have done your assessment of the present situation, where you want to be in the future and defined your strategic vision and intent, you have to figure out strategic objectives. They are initiatives to lead you from present to the future. These objectives are building blocks of the strategic intent. But they are for shorter period of time than the intent. Objectives need to be:

• Interconnected with the strategic vision and strategic intent;
• Large enough to get the desired result;
• Clear, compact, and desired;
• Specific about what you are trying to accomplish; and
• Quantitatively measurable

Finally, when you have put all these things together, you can define the action plan to get where you want to be and you can have your measurable strategic objectives ready for executing the plan. Be aware that in war no plan survives the first encounter with the enemy. The same happens to your strategy while you are executing it. You will probably have to change your plan and its objectives. You may even have to change your strategic intent.

To be fair, my knowledge and skills about strategy are very limited. Please be free to correct any mistakes in the text. I doubt it is complete enough for this mental model. I will get back to this theme when I understand and learn more about it.

-TT

Requirements and commonalities of the mental models

I recommend you to build your own latticework of mental models. It doesn´t matter whether you are talking about a general latticework or a latticework related in your area of expertise, or you are combining them. No matter who you are, you don´t use all the same models than others. You are an individual and you have your own needs and wants. You have to figure out yourself the models that have the greatest importance. Everyone should use most of the models I have introduced in their own general latticework, but not all of them. There are some requirements or commonalities about the models that should be used.

Models are evergreen

All the models have to withstand the test of time. Most of them were true thousands or billions of years ago, like psychological tendencies and compounding. Scientific principles behind them may have been proven in the last few hundred years, but people have known their existence much longer. When you are building your latticework of mental models, you should focus on the models that haven´t changed for a long time. Basic principles of all the major disciplines like mathematics, physics, biology, and chemistry are a good starting point. These principles have been true for a long time and will be true in the future.

You have to understand that some of the models I have introduced and some models you think are important can change in the future. The biggest changes come from artificial intelligence. Many models of human behavior will become less useful. When you will have a smaller role in decision making, many psychological tendencies have smaller influence on your behavior. To be honest, I have no idea if or when this happens. It is beyond my expertise.

Models are versatile

Single purpose for a single model is not enough. All your models have to have many useful applications and have various uses. For example, inertia can be seen as a habit, status quo preservation, or it can be used for forecasting a movement of objects, etc. All the models you have in your latticework should have many purposes. Instead of looking out for a model that is a solution for a single problem, it should be possible to use it as a solution or part of it for many problems. There are thousands or even millions of different models. By using versatile models, you can minimize the amount of models you need to understand. Deep understanding of a smaller amount of models is more important than knowing many single models.

Models have to be interconnected with many other models. For example, when inertia, the path of least resistance, critical mass, and some other models are combined, you understand habits and their formation better than you would undertand by thinking only about inertia. Most things in the world are interconnected somehow. You limit your understanding by using models with no interconnections with other models. With this understanding you understand all disciplines better. For example, by using models only from economics, you don´t understand economics as well as by understanding how they are connected with models from other disciplines like psychology, or even physics.

Models are simple

You have to make your models in the latticework as simple as possible, but no more simpler. The definition of the model has to be simple. It cannot be many sentences long. Most adults have to understand it by reading it once. Even though simple models are important, deep understanding of them can take years. Simple models and how they can be used are hard to understand. Most people cannot understand complex models. And less people understand how many simple models are interconnected. Understanding interconnections of many complex models is close to impossible. This is the reason why all the models have to be simple. Basic principles in the most important scientific disciplines are a starting point. They are the most profound and simplest models. By understanding them, you can understand more about the world and people in it than most of the other people. The amount of models you have to understand becomes smaller. And you have a restricted bandwith. You cannot understand hundreds of profound models. You can understand only tens of them.

These are the most important requirements or commonalities of the most useful mental models. By using them, you can create your latticework. You can have other requirements too. These are just mine.

-TT

Contrast misreaction tendency

Definition

Contrast misreaction tendency can be defined as: ”Making wrong conclusions from an obvious difference between two or more things.”

Your brain is a contrast-detection machine

Imagine yourself living 50,000 years ago. You are a hunter-gatherer and you search food in the jungle. Everything looks and feels normal until you notice some sudden movement on the tree close to you. At the moment this happens, all your efforts and attention go to recognizing the source of the movement. This time it is a harmless bird, but it could have been a poisonous snake or some bigger predator. Your brain is scanning contrasts in your environment. It hasn´t really changed in these 50,000 years. Sometimes contrast can lead you to wrong conclusions. Majority of decisions you make because you detect a contrast are right. And majority of these decisions are irrelevant.

Your nervous system doesn´t react to scientific units. Instead, it relies to something much simpler. It relies to differences that are noticed by your senses. You need to have a point of reference, when you are noticing the contrast. The difference between this point and the other point you compare it with is the contrast. The difference between point of reference and the compared point can be anything. You can find contrast between anything like numbers, items, sounds, colors, etc. Without significant difference, contrast is not established. The difference also shouldn´t be too big.

Contrast can be a good or a bad thing

You can use contrast to your advantage. When you need to use some item daily, you can increase its availability to you by putting it to place where the contrast between the item and its surroundings is noticeable. By increasing the contrast between the good things and their reference points, you can make good things more available. You can also put an unwanted item to a place in which there is no contrast between the item and its surroundings. You can also make things more valuable this way.

Deterioration to bad health can happen gradually. Weight can be gained slowly. Gaining few extra kilograms every year. After a decade you start to have problems with your health. Sometimes changes happen fast. For example, magician can put you on a pedestal that moves really slowly around. Then they can make some item disappear, because you haven´t noticed any contrast between the position in which you were when the movement started. Many salesmen use contrast into your disadvantage. For example, real estate brokers can show crappy houses on sale first and then proceed to the descent house. The latter house looks much better than it would look without showing the crappy ones. Anything can be made to look more valuable by doing this. Sometimes you do it to yourself without knowing it. It is hard to protect yourself from it even when you know in advance that contrast will exist.

Rejection then retreat technique is a combination of contrast misreaction and reciprocity

Rejection and retreat technique is simple. For example, a representative of a charitable organization first makes a request he is sure that you refuse to comply. Then he makes another much more reasonable request. The difference between these requests is big. For example, he asks a donation of 100$ first. After your refusal to this request he asks 5$. The probability of you complying gets much bigger than it would have without the first request. There is a fine line between a functioning difference and nonfunctioning difference. If the first request is too unreasonable this tactic backfires. The reason why this tactic will likely succeed is that a person who gets the first request feels responsible to reciprocate by complying to the second request after rejecting the first one. The second reason is that this person also feels like he was the person who had all the power.

How to avoid the effects on this tactic on us? Doing your homework before you go buying stuff and saying to the salesman that you are looking for a particular item could reduce the effect. There are no guarantee it works. You can also be the person who initiates communication by saying you are not interested without listening any requests. Sometimes these requests are so surprising that it is impossible to prepare for them.

And like with other biases, we have different ways of dealing with contrast. Some people have bigger probability of suffering more from contrast misreaction than others. What you should do is follow your behavior in different situations and make at least mental notes for how you behave.

Sources:

Influence, Robert Cialdini
Poor Charlie´s Almanack, Peter Kaufman

-TT

Reciprocity rule

Definition

Reciprocity rule can be defined as: ”You should try to repay, in kind, what other person has provided to you.”

Reciprocity works because of the feeling of indebtedness

When you get a favor, present, invitation or some other action, you start feeling you are in debt for the person who did this for you. It is a natural reaction. You can´t help it. It won´t happen all the time. It is only more probable reaction. If you break this rule of giving back to your helper, it can backfire, when you have the biggest need for another one. In modern society, it is not always necessary. When the survivability depended on the other people, it was obligatory to return the favor. Because most of your brain functions are from that period of time, this reaction is hardwired into your brain. The feeling of indebtedness is less likely to be born, when the repayment is asked by the person who is producing the favor. The obligation to receive a favor is the main motivator in this rule. It reduces your ability to choose whether you want to be indebted or not. Or to choose to whom you want to be obligated to repay.

This act of giving a favor, present, or other thing doesn´t need to be wanted. You don´t really have to want anything to feel indebtedness. The pure act of someone doing something for you can be enough. The similarity of the favor given in return is the key. If you are not able to give anything similar in return, reciprocity rule doesn´t work properly. The obligation to return the favor diminishes. Sometimes it totally disappears. You can produce the need to repay a bigger favor by producing a small favor first. Free sample is a way to use this rule. A small and free sample is given to potential customers in the hope of getting a bigger response from them. A free piece of bread is used to sell the whole loaf of bread. This piece of bread is a gift and it can create a reciprocity effect. Commercial products have smaller effects than real favors. Some concession professionals like salesmen can also ask a big favor from you that they are sure you are going to decline. Then, they will ask a smaller favor. By requesting something big first, they create a possibility for themselves to reciprocate first. In reality, they are aiming for the smaller favor all the time.

Reciprocity rule is stronger, when external and internal pressure are combined

A group of people do not like to see person´s who are not willing to reciprocate. They are disliked by the group. Sometimes they are even discarded from the group. This doesn´t happen if group knows that person is unable to repay the favor for some reason like a special circumstance or capability. All the favors within the group should be repaid. If it is not possible to act completely in a similar way, another way that is close the initial favor should be applied. Attacking the person who does the favor is a worst thing you can do in a group. Combining this external pressure to produce a repayment with an internal pressure makes reciprocity effect more powerful. This rule creates concessions in two ways. First, it creates an internal pressure to respond in kind. Second, it is the obligation reciprocate a concession by applying external pressure from the group to comply with the request to reciprocate.

Preventing reciprocation rule for not happening

First I would like to say that this rule is good for the world. It is also good for you, most of the time. Sometimes it works against you and these occasions should be avoided. You cannot avoid all of them, but you can diminish their effects. The best way to avoid the bad effects of reciprocity rule is to prevent the activation of it. Best way to do it is avoid all the possibilities of this happening. Sometimes you know in advance that you are going to get an unwanted favor. For example, some selling situations work the same way all the time. These situations can have the same sequence of events. For example, notifying the requester in advance that you have no time for anything else than doing the thing you are interested in.

In theory, rejecting the initial response may be enough. However, in practice, it is harder to avoid this effect this way. You also have to probably add something to your response to prevent the chance for other questions. For example, ”I am not interested in giving 100$ dollars for charity or any money at all.” There are many situations in which you know in advance that they use favors for getting what they want. At least here in Finland, they offer you some coffee and something with them in order to make it easier to comply their requests while they are selling something. In my own life, I have mostly been in a situations where some investing brokerages or marketers have done this. You can make a decision in advance that you will be there only for the coffee. This makes it harder for the requester to make you comply to their request.

As with all the other biases, reciprocity effect works better when it is combined with others. One of them is a contrast misreaction tendency, which is a topic in the next week.

Until then,

-TT

Simplifying through elimination

Most people want more friends, more money, more items, and more everything. Most often, this is the hardest way to improve. Eliminating the unnecessary things from your life is probably easier for you. It benefits you as much as focusing on the most important things. Addition is much easier than elimination. Most often, your outcomes suffer through addition. It is more probable that eliminating things will improve your outcomes.

Elimination is hard, because world gets complicated all the time. You have too many tasks, people, and clutter in your life. The amount of all the things in your mind, at home, and at work is enormous. Most of them are useless. Even most things in your laptop and in your smartphone are useless. You waste your most important commodity, time, to these useless things. And even most people in your life have negative influence on you. You waste your time with them. All the useless things just make your life more complex. If you want to have a simpler and more enjoyable life, you should reduce the amount of things in it. You may have to hurt somebody´s feelings. You have to pay the price to get better outcomes in your life. But it is worth the effort.

Eliminating unnecessary tasks

You waste time by doing the unnecessary tasks. You cannot eliminate all of them. You should then consider delegating them to others, automate them, or minimize their bad effects on you. You have a limited amount of time during the day. And you have even more limited amount of best hours during a day. You should use these hours for the most important tasks in your life. To make sure this happens, you should eliminate all the unnecessary tasks or transfer them to worse hours during your day. Unnecessary tasks have some common characteristics:

• Tasks you don´t like
• Tasks you are bad at
• Tasks that are always interrupted
• Tasks that are not necessary for your life or your career
• Tasks that have done the same way for decades
• Tasks in which your colleagues are useless or unreliable
• Tasks in which the schedule has erupted and the end is not in sight

You can probably define more characteristics for the unnecessary tasks. Everybody doesn´t have the same list of characteristics. Instead of believing in my list, I encourage you to consider your own one and taking necessary steps to diminish their effect on you.

Getting rid of unnecessary items

You have thousands of different items at your home. These items have some costs you probably haven´t thought about. They cost you time, space, effort, mental bandwith, etc. You may even have a garage or some warehouse space for your unnecessary items. You will probably think they are worth more than they actually are. You can probably get some money for them or some favors by giving them to someone else, but that makes your life more complex. All these items have some common characteristics:

• You haven´t used it for a while
• They take too much space
• Their maintenance costs are high
• They were gifts you hate
• They are too difficult to use

It is not easy to let these items go from your life. You may hurt somebody´s feelings, etc. Keep things simple when you get rid of these items. Start with one item that is easy to get rid of.

Eliminating people from your life

Your brains are not designed for having too many people in your life. Some anhropologists have come to conclusion that people can have between 150 and 250 relationships in their lives. The amount of close relationships is much smaller. You should eliminate as many bad relationships as possible to make room for the good ones. There are some common characteristics of bad relationships:

• They drain your energy
• Only one person gets all the benefits from it
• Meeting them is no fun for you most often
• You don´t trust the other person
• The drama is always present in this relationship

Relationships are probably harder to eliminate than unnecessary items or even tasks. You can even have some close relatives that have a bad and uncorrectable relationship with you. You can have friends you have known since childhood. You cannot change others. Therefore, the best way is probably to have some distance from them. Social skills are not my thing. I am bad at them. Therefore, you shouldn´t really believe me. Think yourself and have your own conclusions.

It is harder for you to eliminate things in your life. Whether they are tasks, items, or people, your ego reduces your willingness to get rid of things. You believe that your tasks, items, and people in your life are more valuable they really are. It happens to everyone. My texts are more valuable to me than for the rest of the world, even though it is hard to believe. Simplifying life is beneficial for everyone, maybe except kids. Simplify your life and enjoy better outcomes!

-TT

Anglo-American long term cycle, part 4 Crisis era

If and when Howe and Strauss were right, things could escalate to the full-blown Crisis. Current cycle is in a Crisis era. You can see many commonalities between the era we live now and the era in the end of 1930s. It is possible that all the things happening now are just random noise and I, Howe and Strauss are wrong. Investor Ray Dalio also sees things as we do. World is about to go into the climax of a Crisis era.

The anatomy of a Crisis era

Crisis era lasts normally something between 15 and 25 years. Once has it been very short. This happened during the Civil War in the US. Era starts with a catalyst or catalysts. It can be a burst of an economic bubble, like in the 1929, a Civil War, a declaratio of independence, or some surprise in general election. These catalysts change the mental state of the majority in a country. It can happen suddenly or slowly. Normally change starts from one to five year after the catalyst. Society starts determining itself differently along the period of time. People are more interested in developing institutions than themselves. They start repelling individuals who are more interested about themselves than the community they live in. Some people may start destroying the assets of the rich people. In this era, the differences in the incomes between the rich and poor are the largest. Culture and technology are used for strengthening the behavior for the common good.

Protecting society from the new threats takes over. Problems are exaggerated. When these problems are trying to be solved, the problems get bigger. These solutions are simple and demanding. Instead of solving the reasons for the problems, people focus on the symptoms. Leaders use institutions to solve problems in the society. Leaders are bad during the Crisis. People still believe them and their solutions. The role of a family grows in society. Social interaction grows too. Cooperation is based on survival, not fairness. Some people and generations need to sacrifice their benefits for the common good. This can lead to a division of labor among the gender and age. Children are overprotected compared to adults and women are overprotected compared to men. The promises made about the well-fare of people before the Crisis won´t be kept. It becomes impossible.

During the climax of the Crisis, the role of the people is the strongest. The rage in the individuals has transformed into rage of the community. Protectionism and xenophobia are strongest. The probability of wars is highest. If they are fought, there could be a bitter end with extensive destruction. The probabilities for Civil Wars and revolutions are highest during the climax. Politicians have bigger moral rationales for destroying the enemy than normally. They have no room for compromises in their minds. Common people want an utter destruction of the enemy. Climax of the Crisis is society´s counterpart for nature´s earthquakes and floods. The destruction creates the change in society. It can be good or bad. You cannot know it beforehand. Climax normally happens from one to five years before the end of a Crisis era.

Commonalities between today and 1930s

The catalyst of the former Crisis era concluded in 1929, when the stock market crashed. You can also see that financial crash 2007-2009 concluded this Crisis. Finally central banks had to print money because they had no other way of solving the financial crisis. In the 1930s, there was a Great Depression. This financial crisis was a Great Recession. People didn´t suffer financially as badly as in the 1930s. The recover was faster this time. This recovery haven´t really solved the financial problems of the great majority of people. The former recovery didn´t either. When this happens, the great majority feels that capitalism and democracy do not function well enough for them. Populism increased like it did in the former crisis. Catastrophe is bound to happen, when these problems are not solved. During the 1930s, the dominant world power Great Britain confronted the rising power Germany. Today, there is about to be a big conflict between the dominant world power US and China. A hybrid was is on. It is hard to forecast whether it becomes a full blown conflict that is fought until destruction.

Archetypes during a Crisis era

In a Crisis era, Prophets can be seen more as spiritual elder leaders than active seniors. They highlight their physical weaknesses. They are more interested in religious beliefs and are willing to praise the lord for younger generations. Women are more interested in religion than men. Political leaders are often Prophets during the Crisis. These gray champions demand moral values from the younger people. They also need to understand that their economic wellbeing is diminished during Crisis. Their financial benefits are reduced for the sake of younger generations. Boomers have lived without great financial problems until now. They have to get used to have less money for consumption. Some of them will work after retirement, especially during a climax of the Crisis.

Nomads are in midlife during a Crisis. This archetype has the biggest financial suffering. They have the biggest role in solving problems in society. They have to think about conflicts between there own benefits and the socially acceptable solutions. Their number one goal is survival of the society. They have also the greatest responsibility in getting people to work on common good, instead of their own benefits. Nomads are flexible employees. They are willing to change jobs and their behavior if they are necessary for their survival. A typical success story is an entrepreneur who is known for his technological ingenuity, being flexible, and his cunning plans. Typical failure is a person who takes big risks and do not accept their losses on time.

Heroes represent cooperation during a Crisis. They guide technological development for more communal purposes. Facebook is one good example. Mark Zuckerberg belongs to Hero generation. Heroes work in bigger groups of people than other generations during Crisis. Older generations see them as a generation who works towards its own good, but it is not true. During a climax this is a big thing. Without this cooperation, there would have been a catastrophic solution for each Crisis era. Heroes solve problems through cooperation much better than older generations´ expectations. The behavior and clothing of young adults will become more harmonized. Individuality suffers. They are ready for sacrifices because of the common good. They will use violence if necessary and they are willing to fight for the bitter end. As an employees, Heroes strengthen the role of labor unions during a Crisis. They will also take care of decreasing the differences in income between the poor and the rich.

Artists have only small roles during a Crisis. They are either in the late elderhood or childhood. They are dependent on others. Artists are overprotected as children. They also suffer from losses of parents more than any other archetype. They help adults by doing small chores like cleaning or vacuuming. In the late elderhood, Artists can only follow how the Crisis advances from the side and hope for wellbeing for their last years of life.

I could also speculate about the future, but I will not do that, because I cannot forecast anything.

This is all for the long term Anglo-American cycle.

-TT

Angloamerican long-term cycle, part 3, generational archetypes

As it is with Turnings, there are four generational archetypes. Each archetype has their own common characteristics. These characteristics are found from the majority of each generation. Each generation lasts about a one phase of life. All these archetypes arrive always in the same order. Each archetype has its own way of reacting to events in different phases of life. These phases of life start from childhood, moves through young adulthood to midlife, and ends in elderhood. One can also add late elderhood for the fifth phase, but it is irrelevant in this context. There are not enough people in late elderhood to have a significant effect on events in the world. Each archetype in each phase of life has a different effect on other archetypes. These effects are guided by the long-term cycle with four Turnings.

Childhood is a time for growing, learning, and approving the need for protection from older generations. The social role of children hasn´t really changed in the last decades, even though technology and medicine have improved significantly. When the childhood ends, young adulthood begins. In this phase of life, it is time to transform ideas and dreams into projects and plans. It is also time for building a career and starting a family. Midlife is a time for conserving lifestyle, and transferring dreams and ideas into reality. Guiding younger generations is one of the most important tasks at this phase of life. Most people also start realizing their aging and start seeing signs of their transformation towards elderhood. Most people die in this fourth phase of life. This is the time when you can stop caring about your duty towards the society and finish your career.

There is a contradiction to consider, when you think about how the generations are formed. History makes the generations and generations make history. It is not easy to define the generations when new children are born so much every second. So the question is how do you define the generations? First, you need to define the length of each generation. A generation is a group of people who have been born in the same time in history. This time has the approximate length of one phase of life which is around twenty years. One generation has seen the same events at the same time. Second, majority of the generation have similar beliefs about families, gender roles, institutions, politics, religion and future. And majority of them react the same way for the same events. Any individual can still have his own ways of believing and reacting. Third, they have a sense of belonging to a certain generation. For example, Millennials feel they belong to their own group of people. Each generation has also its own biography.

Different archetypes

Prophets are born and raised during a High. They come of age as a narcissistic young adults during an Awakening. When they are in midlife, they cultivate their moral principles during an Unraveling and they become wise gray champions during a Crisis. During this fourth Turning, leaders are usually Prophets. They guide younger generation to a great victory or catastrophe. Other archetypes see them as narcissistic, arrogant, and ruthless. They are principally endowed towards vision, values, and religion. Prophets have the greatest Effect on Heroes, and vice versa. The reason for this is that when Prophets are in midlife, Heroes are in childhood, and vice versa. Some of the Prophets that had big effects on people in history were, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt. The best known Prophet today is probably Donald Trump.

Nomads are born and have a liberal upbringing during an Awakening. During an Unraveling, they become marginalized from the society when they are in young adulthood. Their actions are pragmatic during a Crisis in midlife and they accept their destiny as ignored elders during a High. During this Turning, their efforts and actions during a Crisis are forgotten. Some of them are even humiliated with a lack of respect from younger generations, even though they were the most important generation for the victory during the last Turning. Other archetypes see them as practical, cultureless, and amoral. They are principally endowed towards freedom, survival, and honor. Nomads have the biggest effect on Artists, and vice versa. Some of the Nomads that had big effects on people in history were George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower. The best known Nomad today is probably Barach Obama.

Heroes are born and protected during an Unraveling. They have a role as cooperative young adults for solving a Crisis. They are then guided by some Prophets and middle-aged Nomads for getting the best possible result from the Crisis. During a High, they are arrogant middle-aged people and during an Awakening, they are strong and effective elders. Other archetypes see them as selfless, capable and mechanistic. They are principally endowed towards community, technology, and prosperity. Heroes have the biggest effect on Prophets, and vice versa. Some of the Heroes that had big effects on people in history were Thomas Jefferson, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan. Most known Hero today is probably Mark Zuckerberg.

Artists are born as overprotected children during a Crisis and they are senstive yound adults during a High. They function as undecided middle-aged leaders during an Awakening and are emphatic elders during an Unraveling. Others archetypes see them as open-minded, emotional and undecided. They are principally endowed towards competence, due process, and pluralism. Artists have the biggest effect on Nomads, and vice versa. Some of the Artists that had big effects on people in history were Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Colin Powell. The best known Artist today is probably Warren Buffett.

Next week, I will publish a text about an ongoing Crisis. Until then,

-TT

Anglo-American long-term cycle, part 2 Turnings

As I previously told you, each complete cycle has had four different seasons. The first cycle started in 1435 from the third turning, an Unraveling. Since then, the Anglo-American world has completed six full cycles. Today, the Anglo American world is in the fourth cycle, a Crisis. This is the turning in which the biggest changes happen. A society fights for its survival. It is almost impossible to forecast which will be the end result. The length of a Turning is normally 15-30 years. Only once, the length of the season has been something else. This happened in the Civil War in the US. That season lasted only five years. These Turnings have changed in the same order through all the history:

• The first Turning is called a High.
• The second Turning is called an Awakening
• The third Turning is called an Unraveling
• The fourth Turning is called a Crisis

Each Turning has its own characteristic social mood. After the Turning has changed, people think about themselves, institutions and society differently. These Turnings can change gradually or suddenly. The reason for each change is that different generational archetypes move to the next stages of their lives. Each of these archetypes are equally important. They will be introduced in the next week. Each Turning is also important in its own way. Each Turning moves the society towards another rebirth, which comes after the Crisis has been resolved.

The first Turning, a High

A High can the best Turning for a society. It begins after the society has resolved the most important basic issues of the prior Crisis. Last High started soon after the World War II ended. This Turning is mostly a great time for people who accept the majoritarian culture and society´s major role in their lives. The destruction of society is finally left behind, even though people don´t really know it. People are happy for what they have achieved during the Crisis. Wars are unlikely. Institutions are reinforced and individualism is low. People are unified and moving the society into the same direction. Families are strong, divorce rates are low and the birth rate is high. Inner life of people is weak and spiritual life minuscule. Vision of the future is brightening.

The second Turning, an Awakening

An Awakening begins after some events have triggered a cultural revolution. For example, last Awakening started after the Kennedy assassination in 1963. After the Awakening has arrived, people start worrying about their inner life, instead of worrying about the society or its institutions. People become cynical, public order starts deteriorating and there are wide protests for a better society. Crime and substance abuse rise. Awakenings are remembered for their images of extreme social behaviors like mass demonstrations, even riots. Children become underprotected and they have liberal upbringing. Creativity peaks and it is directed towards spiritual values. In the end, people have a consensus opinion that they have better inner life than the collective social order. In the end of this era, vision of the future becomes euphoric.

The third Turning, an Unraveling

An Unraveling begins after the society and its people perceive that the new cultural mindset is in place. This era has a psychology of abundance and maximum individualism. People do not trust the government or institutions, but they do trust themselves. People also express themselves through commercialism. They show themselves through brands and prosperity. Economic booms and busts are probable. Spiritualism is declining. Individual moral is low. In the beginning, people are happy, and they trust their future will be great. Eventually, they experience the change in their mood. They become nervous about the future. They start thinking about more corrupt society and see it splitting into smaller pieces. The vision of future darkens in an Unraveling.

The fourth Turning, a Crisis

A Crisis begins after some events have triggered an upheaval in public life. This is the most important Turning during a long-term cycle. This Turning defines the direction for the society for the next long-term cycle. It is the era of destroying the old and rebirth. Its conclusion can be a glorious victory or a complete disaster. Most people that remember the last Crisis have no effect on society as a whole. The memories of the old horrors are gone. Most people will find a common enemy and rediscover teamwork and social discipline. People also start complying to the authorities, crime descends, substance abuse and birthrate decline and people accept the sacrifice they need to do to defeat the enemy. They are ready to do whatever is needed. Wars are likely, as is protectionism. There are less immigrants because foreigners are the ones who get most of the blame about the deterioration of social order. Vision of the future is urgent. There is a great need for fast action.

This was the overview of each of the four Turnings. They vary in length, but have the same order. These Turnings never move backwards. After a High never comes a Crisis, or an Unraveling never comes after a Crisis. Without a great chaos, these patterns do not change in the Anglo-American world. This cycle can come to an end or it can accelerate or stop. It is hard to imagine how this could happen, but nuclear war or biological weapons could cause an end to this cycle. Or a regime change like China taking controlling the whole Anglo-American world could be the end of this cycle. It is very unprobable that this would happen, but it is possible.

Anglo-American long term cycle, Saeculum, Part 1, Basics

What we learn from history that we do not learn from history

-Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

I will focus on the Anglo-American long-term cycles and generations in this text. For now, Anglo-American world is the most dominant one in this globe. This thing may change in this century. To me, this change is actually more probable than continuous Anglo-American dominance. This first part is about the basics of a saeculum cycle, its four different seasons and different archetypes of generations. ”History does not repeat but it rhymes”, said Mark Twain. This text is mostly based on the book called ”The Fourth Turning”, written by William Strauss and Neil Howe. This book is an excellent and worthwhile reading. It was written in the middle of 1990s and is still relevant. Some of its forecasts have actualized and some of them have not.

As you can divide a year for four different seasons, you can do the same for a long-term saeculum cycle. A long term cycle lasts 80-100 years and in an Anglo-American societies they have lasted from the 1400s. These long-term cycles can be divided into four generational cycles called turnings. They represent different seasons in one long-term cycle. These turnings can last anything from 15-30 years, like different phases of life. Most often they last about 18-22 years. These turnings are a first turning called a High, second turning called an Awakening, third turning called an Unraveling and fourth turning called a Crisis. There are four phases of human life, childhood, young adulthood, midlife and elderhood. One generational archetype dominates one phase of life in one turning. These archetypes are:

• A Prophet generation, born in a High
• A Nomad generation, born in an Awakening
• A Hero generation, born in an Unraveling
• An Artist generation, born in a Crisis

You have to understand these archetypes and their role in the long term cycle. You have to understand that majority of the people in one generation have special characteristics these archetypes have, not all of them. These characteristics are formed by the events of history and vice versa. You have to also understand that without different archetypes, their wouldn´t be different turnings. A new archetypal generation is born, when most people of the same generation are either dead or living their last years. These archetypes are the main reasons why long term cycle reoccurs again and again.

About the length and reason of the cycle

Most people in Anglo-American countries are not aware of these long-term cycles and their roles in them. A Crisis in the end of the cycle happens, because most people who remember the last Crisis are long gone. A society and the nature have to complete their social and biological changes. Periodic destruction in the end of the cycle is needed to renew the society and the nature. Human life time is the natural rhytm for these cycles. How could it be anything else? The changes in political regimes, natural disasters, and technology vary in length, but natural human life cycle hasn´t much changed in the previous centuries. People died before in diseases and wars before their natural life spans ended.

The most important reason for why people are doomed to see these long-term cycles are that they think linearly. People think mostly about today and they forget to think about longer-term cycles. They have no idea about seasonal changes in societies. Within a long-term cycle, each season has its own characteristics. These characteristics vary within a cycle more than seasons in different long-term cycles. An Unraveling in one cycle looks more like the Unraveling in the previous cycle than an Awakening and Unraveling in the same cycle. The reason for variation is that different archetypes have different roles in different seasons. Different generations are dominating different seasons. Archetypes in young adulthood and in midlife have bigger roles in seasons. These dominant archetypes also move their actions and behaviors for reflecting their own lifetime experiences. Thus, their efforts are directed into different directions than the efforts of the previous dominant archetypes. These changes in efforts move people from one season to another. The most dominant archetypes have the biggest effects on the second younger generation. For example, Nomads that are in midlife right now have the most effects on Artists in the childhood.

This text was part 1 of the Anglo-American cycles and generations.

There is more to come in the next few weeks. You will be less well prepared for the future, if you don´t understand a long-term cycle.

-TT

The Interconnections in and between systems

Before going to this text, you should probably read this, unless you are familiar with systems and its components.

Most things are interconnected. You cannot look only separate elements and their inputs and outputs and find out how the system works as a whole. You have to see how independent elements interact together. You have to understand what happens when an element A interacts with an element B. You have to understand what happens what happens to the element B when the element A changes its output or what happens to an element C, when the elements A and B change. Sometimes these interconnections are just information flows and sometimes they are feedback loops.

Interconnections can be loosely or tightly connected. Some of the elements can be isolated, but they are rare. It is also hard to find some systems that are isolated from others. Your body is one example of systems within the system. Some of its elements are loosely connected with others and some of them are tightly connected. Tight connections between different elements or systems are more efficient than loose connections. There are opportunity costs between the efficiency and the probability of not having a system failure. The more tightly connected the elements or systems are, the bigger the probability of system failure. When the failure hits the tightly connected element, the whole system will probably fail. In these cases, there is often only one path to a successful outcome. Systems can be loosely or tightly coupled as a whole.

Interconnectivity can be divided into four degrees of connectivity

Interconnectivity can be divided into four different degrees of connectivity:

1. Underconnected state: primitive cultures and undeveloped countries may be underconnected. This basically means that their environment may change without them knowing it. And they cannot do anything to react to the change.
2. Interconnected state: When the environment changes gradually, businesses, economic systems and governments are capable of keeping up with the change. For example, evolution works most often in the interconnected state.
3. Highly connected state: In this state, businesses, economic systems and governments are driving change. Capitalism, in its purest sense, works in a highly connected state. Sometimes it becomes overconnected.
4. Overconnected state: In this state, institutions, change so quickly that the environment in which they are embedded are unable to cope. Or the other way around: environment changes so quickly, because of the increase in interconnections that the institutions are unable to cope. Overconnected states provide disruption in one way or another. The crash of 2007-2009 was one of the best examples of a system in an overconnected state. The system failure was very close.

System safety and interconnections

Negative feedback loops mostly help make systems safer, but positive loops can cause serious problems. Positive feedback reinforces and amplifies change, accelerating it and causing the environment getting more unstable. In many tightly interonnected environments, initial stimulus works its way through the environment and back through feedback loops to provide more stimulus to the system. This drives the system faster in the same direction and causes rapid change. This rapid change causes more rapid change with increasing speed until the system will brake down. This is why you need to have balancing feedback loops in the system. They protect the system from rapid and unpredictable changes. These changes are the most dangerous ones. There can be long delays before these positive feedback loops start showing signs of trouble. Then it can be too late.

Information flows can also cause some problems in systems. They are always somewhat delayed. When the flow of information is delayed too much, the system can get into trouble. For example, when the balancing feedback loop has too big of a delay, the reinforcing feedback loop changes the system too much that it can cope with the change. Delays are hard to time properly. And they are also hard to notice sometimes.

Changing and removing interconnections can make a system safer too. Making looser interconnections can help systems become less delay dependent. They become less depended on the timing of the delay. Sometimes looser interconnections can help you to process things in parallel. Then you can have multiple actions in the same time. A system with tight interconnections may not be able to achieve this. You can also make a system safer by removing some of its interconnections. The more interconnections and the more tighter they are, the more probable it is that the system will fail. You should think about your interconnections in your systems and start removing all the unnecessary ones.

Sources:

Overconnected, William H. Davidow
Thinking in Systems Donella H Meadows

-TT

How social contagions reach critical mass, part 3, right environment

Sorry about being a day late. I was in a short trip on monday and yesterday.

Before reading this, you should read the first and the second part of how social contagions reach critical mass.

I have written about the messengers and messages and what I still have left is the environment, in which, the messengers can deliver the messages. It is quite easy to compose a sticky message and find a messenger to deliver the message compared to manipulating the environment that spreads the message. To be honest, for me the manipulating of the environment part is almost impossible and possibly to the other people too. When the environment is right, reaching the criticcritical mass happens very fast. For example, one suicide triggered the Arab Spring. The reason that happened was the underlying conditions in people´s minds.

Epidemics are sensitive to the conditions and circumstances of the times and places in which they occur. Engaging some kind of behavior is coming more from the certain environment than from other people. You constantly underestimate the role of the environment and other people in how you behave. The reason for this is that you overestimate your ability to make decisions through your rational part of the brain. This means that your inner states are the results of your environment more than you think. When the underlying context around you is right, the small push is enough. Most often, you can control your environment well, but when the timing and the environment is right, even the small changes are enough. For example, having first a zero tolerance for crime and then allowing exceptions like braking some windows or letting people travel in metro without paying the ticket will encourage people to do bigger crimes.

There is another way to launch an epidemic and it is through small and solid groups of people. As a partner of these groups we are subjected to social proof. According to anhtropologist Robin Dunbar the maximum amount of people in a solid and homogenous group is 150 people. Dunbar has researched humans and other primates. Dunbar came in the conclusion that the size of the frontal lobe is the conclusive feature. And this allows the magic number of 150 to be the capacity of following other people. In the bigger groups, people are grouping into smaller groups that are having different opinions about things. Spreading messages is more efficient, when the group size do not reach over 150 people. Building communities should happen this way. When the size gets too big, you should split the group in two and let it grow until 150 members is reached.

Creating a right environment

Creting the right environment is hard. In theory, it can be done by designing an environment in which many psychological tendencies move people to the same direction. There are some environments like this. For example, cults. I am not saying you should build a cult, but you can learn from them. You should definitely be aware of their possible effect on you.

In a cult, there is a restricted availability of contrary stimuli compared to its message. To create a contageous environment, you have to maximize the availability of your message and minimize the availability of contrasting messages. You can use the help of the significant few to do this. Connectors, experts and salesmen can help you to do this. In a cult, there is usually a charismatic authority figure. Most often they are men. This authority is usually a great salesman. Salesmen can convince connectors and experts to speak on their behalf. Social proof is established by these people. Cults have usually relatively small amount of followers. They are tightly-knit groups. It is hard to have unity, when there are many people. You should spread your message through groups that have a maximum amount of 150 people. Links between these groups could be connectors.

Critical mass of social contagions in short.

Lets finish this talk by adding a summary of critical mass in social contagions in the end. To achieve a critical mass for an epidemic, you need to have messengers who can spread the information really effectively, you need to also have a sticky messages for the messengers to spread and last but not least the environment needs to be completely right with the right timing and the result will be an epidemic that spreads quickly. That is all I have to say this time.

- TT