Cutting Through Decision-Making Noise

Anita Brick: Hi, this is Anita Brick. And welcome to CareerCast at Chicago Booth. To help you advance in your career, today we're delighted to be speaking with Nuala Walsh. She is an award winning business consultant, behavioral scientist, independent non-executive director and ex-CMO. She is the author of the very interesting, and, dare I say, provocative book called Tune In, How to Make Smart Decisions in a Noisy World as MindEquity CEO.

She consults with fortune 500 firms, human rights and sports associations on strategy, reputation, culture and behavioral change. Recognized among the 100 most influential women in finance, her 30 year distinguished investment career includes leadership positions at Blackrock and Merrill Lynch. She is a visiting lecturer on business, criminology,  finance, and decision science, really interesting combo, iniNED, the London School of Economics and the Harvard Kennedy SchoolClearly so accomplished. Thank you for making time for us today.

Nuala Walsh: Not at all, Anita. I'm absolutely thrilled to be here. So thank you for the invitation.

Anita Brick: The book, to be honest, it made me a little uncomfortable. “How do I get heard?” And there are a number of questions. If we could start off with one from an MBA student, he said, you mentioned, how do you want to be heard? You need to hear others. This seems like an overwhelming task. Where would you advise a person to start?

Nuala Walsh: That is a great question, because the premise of the whole book is that we always ask ourselves, who is listening to us? Are we communicating our message clearly enough? Are we heard? In order to actually be heard, you actually need truth to listen to others. But it's not just listening faster or listening, you know, more effectively. We're already good listeners and good decision makers. This really is about interpreting what other people are really saying. Reading between the lines, it's going that extra stage to understand and analyze what people are talking about. Particularly, when you or they are in a moment of crisis or under pressure or uncertainty.

It may seem overwhelming to begin with. It's the essence of being a good leader and improving your ability to make better judgment calls. But I think the missing step is about interpretations to be heard. I think it's focusing not only on yourself. Let's go through it guys—One of the main tracks that people fall into when they're climbing the career ladder, which is in the ego misjudgment trap.

If you only focus on yourself, you only hear yourself. And I do remember when I was in corporate life, I was once told that as a leader, you spend so much time thinking about yourself. You're not actually thinking about your team.

Anita Brick: Not to interrupt that—I understand that, but this sounds very theoretical to me and our audience loves actionable things. How do you sift through the words and the non-verbal? And if we're not in the same room and we're doing this on the boxes, on a screen, what are some things that you can do to decipher? Because we can't always predict the words that match the intent, or even that the nonverbals match the intent. Where do we start? This person is really asking, how do you start? What actions can you take to become better at interpreting because it seems so ambiguous to me.

Nuala Walsh: It's a good question. It's not theoretical. It's actually very practical. The first, most basic thing you have to do is actually appreciate that—I guess we're slightly jumping to the conclusion that people accept these biases and misinterpretations are there.

A lot of people don't. A lot of people take things at face value. Even at the most obvious level,  why are we taking things at face value all the time? Rather reinterpreting. Now, you can't go to the stage where you second guess absolutely everything you hear, or you get solidified and you can't move forward. First step is to at least when it matters. And I think that's the most important thing. Anita, when you're in a high stakes decision situation, when you're stressed or uncertain, you can't just take this information at face value and enter fake news, misinformation, etc. But the problem is, in a noisy world, that is exactly what we're tempted to do. We assume that everything we hear is true.

Rather than thinking what is this other person's agenda? What is in it for them? How does this affect me? Do they understand it enough? Are they expert enough? And I think once you at least put a layer of questioning layer on, and accept the fact that actually everything you hear may not be what you hear and the data may not always be the data, it is at least the first starting point. Rather than assuming that you're always right and in business, the more successful you are, you're always right. Evidence has suggested that you've got a certain position on the ladder because, you know, people fall off the ladder pretty quickly too.

Anita Brick: It's true. There was a question from an alum, like you said, many voices, many sources, and we truncate that process by defaulting to the shortcut. Yeah,  it's been this way before. Someone asked the question, she said, how do you know how to listen and keep an open mind when the source of the information is not on your regular, as she put it in quotes “source list”.

Nuala Walsh: We all know the right voices all the time, so we don't always—You only go to the same source. When I work with my clients, I always ask them something, and this is maybe something that your listeners can very easily do for advice. “Who do you go to? Write down the top three names. So who do you go to for advice? Then you ask yourself, how many of those people are like you— look like you, sound like you, etc.“ the room starts to laugh.

Okay, I'm looking in a mirror here and then ask yourself another question: “Just how many of those people like you?” Then it gets even worse because most of us go to people who are like us, and who like us. What you're doing then is you are only listening to the voices that are like you. So when the question is “how do you know which ones to listen to?”

What the answer is not necessarily the person who looks like you or likes you. Because, by definition, you're going to feed confirmation bias and always get the favorable response. it's different than if you're in a senior position, which is even worse, especially if they're not on your thoughts list go-to person. I mean, that's obviously just looking for people in their field, or third party advisors, or somebody who is not like them.

And I think that is the first part of call—to invite the other’s voices, to invite those people who don't typically get heard in an organization for their opinion, because often they have some of the best and most informed views.

Anita Brick: I like that a lot. I think that the application of that could be a bit tricky because sometimes people who are very different than us would want to forward us their agenda.

How do you maintain stability in your own convictions when you feel like the other person's ego is trying to squash you? That was actually a question from an MBA student as well.

Nuala Walsh: because we are always involved in any table and regardless of level worth when you climb the ladder. I think, and certainly for people. Yeah, yeah for sure. The consequences are more severe when these decisions are well calibrated, how people just rush to judgment or make fast decisions because of the self-imposed deadline applied there. So it is a hard thing to do. I think when you do it with evidence, when you do it calmly, and when you do it without an agenda, rather than just doing it for impression management's sake.I think people really want to hear that voice. I really do not like what you have to say, but I think they really value us.

Anita Brick: Yeah, I think it takes a lot of courage to do that because in the book, this goes along with a question. And I'm asking— in your book, you talk a lot about people who stood up with that dissenting opinion and their lives and their careers were ruined. How do you balance standing up when it could be a dissenting opinion, or an unpopular one, with a little bit of a safety net, so that you don't lose things that are really important to you?

Nuala Walsh: I think that's a terrific question. My research was actually on whistleblowing, trying to motivate companies to get people to speak up. However, with a very big caveat there.

I would never encourage anybody to speak up unless the safety net was there. There are too many examples, as we all well know, of whistleblowers who have lost their jobs, their lives, their careers by doing it in the wrong place. However, what is increasing across industry are a couple of different mechanisms.

One is to do it in groups. The SEC, the study found that people certainly in the large investment banks where I used to work are now reporting in teams. They had rewards. Such things created greater safety for the individual. So they felt empowered to express their view without so much fear of reprisal or judgment. And I think that is key. But as you and I both know, creating psychological safety much talk trash, it's much harder to actually implement.

But there are things that, you know, a lot of things that companies can do. The finding of the devil's advocate role, and, you know, where you basically know somebody of the devil and their job to criticize and condemn any point of view that is made. That gives them a degree of safety so that they can speak up. And the other thing is, little behavioral science will show that if you create a social norm where positive dissent, not just grandstanding, is done properly, it really is welcome. And there are lots of examples of companies who do this incredibly well. Not all is exactly something that I think modern, successful leaders are now grappling with and improving. Even though there may be a way to go.

Anita Brick: So how does this change if it is public? It's not descension or being that voice within a company where the norms are more controlled. What if it is now a public statement of a dissenting voice? That can be really hard and have repercussions.

Nuala Walsh: Clearly I did cue in the book. I found it fascinating that Jack Ma from Alibaba for showing that was a good one. Yeah, yeah, China's most successful billionaire. He gave a speech at the Bundesbank in 2020 that I found most fascinating was he spoke, he said was so torn about whether to come here today and give this speech. In the future. I believe reform, but common sacrifices will come. And of course we did, but because of its own cause, they ultimately got canceled, he disappeared from public view for two years. The biggest IPO in history was canceled of someone who had a voice, who used their voice but didn't think beyond what was the legal power. Was a power cut risk unduly? Just him paid the price even though he did, so did a lot of people around him.

When you hold power, giving a voice, and using that voice judiciously, you know it can be incredibly powerful. And there are many other examples of people who speak up for terrific good.

Anita Brick: No, I get that. I'm thinking about someone who perhaps puts a dissenting view on LinkedIn. They just have a different point of view. What would you advise someone to do to not end up as a casualty? What are some concrete things that you advise your clients or other people that you work with? What sort of safety net can someone have? And maybe it's not possible. Maybe once you put it out there on LinkedIn  or wherever it happens to be, you could get a lot of trolls bashing you or harming you. What do you tell people so that they don't go in naively?

Nuala Walsh: A fantastic question.  This is a cancel culture. Yes, some people now feel they have to have a voice on everything. Why are you expressing this view? You have to or you're looking for attention. What is the purpose of doing this? Are you hoping to influence something? Are you hoping to effect change? Or you are just being opinionated? Or do you feel really strongly and have a moral conscience about this particular topic, that you just want to get your view out there and you feel robust enough that if you're challenged, you can handle it, I will shoot it.

That first question is why am I putting this view out there now? So might my advice is really to be very careful because I'm not sure who wins. It was lost in the noise. Who you really win. Ask yourself, why are you really doing this? The better off in your views.

Anita Brick: What you said is super interesting, and it kind of aligns with certain biases that we may have that would lead to our doing that without thinking of consequences like ego as an example. But if you sit back and you ask yourself why and really think about it and self-reflect a moment to pause that you talk about knowing why and if it is ego and you want to go do it anyway. Not a good idea. I certainly wouldn't recommend it, but some people are going to do that. Understand that there are consequences. I think that's true even in a quote “safer environment” inside an organization that purports to want dissenting opinions. I think you have to ask that question there, too.

Nuala Walsh:I think you are spot on, Anita. I think of many companies and based on my 30 plus years of working in companies, I've had many leaders and bosses who've told me, tell me what you really think. Your view, your honest opinions. They don't want you're right. They just don't listen to what people say. So when Paul says what you really think, he really inviting criticism, then a senior position wants unbridled criticism for less. It's under very specific circumstances. And you have established that relationship with the individual. So I think the relationship with the individual matters. I think the level of hierarchy matters. The kind of longevity you have with the person matters. I still think be careful how you say it. It's about the words you use. It's like the tone you use. I mean, we all know the messenger effect is really important. Who is telling you that piece of advice and why? And it's the same when you're giving your advice to a senior.

Why is this person giving? Because what is their agenda? What biases have they lost and should I listen to? Of course you should listen. But how much weight did I accord to that particular view? So I think you're absolutely right. Sometimes it is better to stay silent. I also learned over my years, I used to think that it was right to be the first voice.

Well, I thought, you know, I give my opinion and here's my first voice, and now I don't in a different capacity, but even  For example, I waited to laugh because someone invited me for my opinion. But in a corporate environment, you constantly feel this urgency, and I think that's part of the noisy world we walk in.You must have an opinion. You must have a voice, you must be heard. And you're probably not their opinion and be more calibrated and more circumspect.

Anita Brick: it is maybe a cautionary tale in other business. A Boothie Said:“Unfortunately, I had a misstep with a leader in my organization in the beginning of my time at the company. I've not been able to correct this perception. How would you start to affect this change, and is it even possible?

Nuala Walsh: It is such a pity that that individual. But they're not alone. It happens to many different people. The first initial while first impressions do laugh, it is possible to repair a damaged perception with a thoughtful, proactive step, but also by time, fixing us in 2 in 2 ways.

First, see if they want to address and solve problems with the individual. I think they need to acknowledge the misstep and take ownership. So this is classic: the apology—. admitting the error, admitting something. I apologize for the harm or the inconvenience or whatever, you know, without deflecting blame or other that way. The other thing that I both, I would suggest is don't overfocus on the individual.

Don't give so much power to that person. And I don't know who the person is. Maybe because of a colleague or senior.  Don't give that person so much power that you are preoccupying your state of mind on their behaviors. I would also say that they are new to the company, I would say to practically build positive relations with other people to reduce the dependency on the person, you know, with whom they hit it off with in the first place, but also to build a wider group of allies and friends within the company.

So it dilutes the power of that first person, and then that other person will hear people going, well, I think this new joiner is high caliber, you know, very friendly, outgoing. I think they will get more positive. You have just one hold-off. There will be plenty of other people. So for me it would be, try not to over focus on it.

And sometimes, I might path also get to the point where they've tried. Things haven't worked. So the fact is you're not going to be loved by everybody in a company. Accept this and move on. Move on to the other people and move on in the relationship and just put it down to a fortunate life lesson. Sometimes there is nothing that can be done, but only when you've tried all these other things.But rather than putting yourself into a state of either conflict or anxiety, I suggest moving on.

Anita Brick: Yeah, I Would agree. I think it's a really good point that you made that it's good to not put all of your social capital in one person and really think about the relationships that you maybe started off really well and the additional ones that you can build, because that does have an impact on reputation. Even if there was this blip at the beginning, it can be transformed most of the time. And I think it's a very good point to diversify the people who know you and value you.

Nuala Walsh: That's right. And ultimately, your own reputation will be built with a different population and your performance, by definition, and using your performance, your performance will speak for itself. Assuming it's a high caliber individual, it will speak for itself, and that will counter any adverse effect that the person may have developed about you.ver time, these things can be overcome in most cases.

Anita Brick: In most cases. I would kind of disagree a little bit. I don't think that performance does speak for itself, at least not in a lot of companies. There is a balance of —do a great job and make sure that you speak up enough, or you are known enough where you develop relationships, who can influence how you're viewed in the company. I think it's both. I mean, I hear this from a lot of people. “I'm doing such a great job and I get really great performance reviews and I'm not moving ahead.”

I mean, I agree with you. You have to. That is like a baseline. You have to do that. But then there's a bit more to shift topics a bit. There is an alumni and he said, “I understand it's important to be timely and reflective in our decision making.“ You say this a lot in the book. You've said it today that it's important to take a bit of a pause to assess, make sure that you're taking in the whole picture and are you jumping to a conclusion or is there something else?He goes on to say:I'm in a work environment that requires fast action, and others are praised for making quick decisions within ambiguous circumstances. How can someone possibly succeed with integrity? I really believe I need to think about things before just giving an answer.

Nuala Walsh: I think that person is absolutely spot on. Such a common problem. The problem, in my view, is that the organization almost sets people against themselves.The context, you know, we live in a fast world,  we make quick decisions. The organization talks about raising to the top, you know, quick turnaround and what's expected of a leader to make the best decision rather than a fast decision. But the organization culture in many cases rewards quick decisions. It is a problem that many, many people face.It is one that doesn't start with the individual. I think there's a great Harvard study that shows leaders who make quick decisions, rather than the best decision, are 12 times more likely to become CEO. So in that sort of a circumstance, how do you go with against that, which is what this individual is asking? Some environments are, you know, much more fast paced, which is a cultural thing, and one individual can't fight a culture, but one individual can influence within their team.

Unknown: We can all influence the team we're in. And again, based on the relationship with the leader of the team, that's something that we're cautious to start. I would prefer that it came from the organization inviting an independent view was one way to slow the process down. So what the individual can do is suggest an independent expert of a third party that will, by definition, slow the process down.I mean, there are plenty of mechanisms and tools that the people can use, but this individual suggests a strategy that has been used elsewhere as objectively successful. I mean, I'm sure you know the five whys, which is, you know, in the 70s, Toyota had an approach to problem solving where they basically believe that most technical problems conceal huge problems. And it's very simple. They just ask why, you know, they keep going down different levels of detail or granularity and ask why five times in any combination is possible. Do you need to remember, even in that process, that the individual says, well, maybe just before we conclude, maybe we could try the five whys? Or can we just check?I think through a very quick risk analysis. They can do a quick analysis,  not a rush to judgment. The individual, can be clever, make themselves look good by introducing a number of these different strategies that slow companies down. And I've seen them use and they do work. They'll usually find that more than one tough, quick decision making.

Anita Brick: I like that a lot. And I was listening as you were speaking. I was thinking this person also could have the reputation for doing the homework ahead of time and bringing powerful insights. Another thing they can control is being on top of things. Do they understand trends? Do they understand factors that are coming into play that could influence these decisions? And I know that's not a short term play. I like the things that you said that could be done at any time. Maybe another thing is, especially if this person likes to be informed, they could be that maybe not an independent voice, but they could be a consistently knowledgeable voice that can add credence to what they're saying.

Nuala Walsh: I think that's a great point, Anita. And a combination of all of those would certainly make a difference and benefit not just the team, but the individual themselves.

Anita Brick: Yeah I agree. Do you have time for one more question? Sure. Wonderful. What are three things that a person could do beginning right now to become someone who cuts through decision making noise for more successful outcomes?

Nuala Walsh: Okay, the first one that I'm going to say is I'm going to architect your decision making environment in the exact same way as at a supermarket design the deals and decide whether you're going to buy, you know, apples or apple cider.

And this is for high stakes decisions. The same principle can be used by anyone who's making a decision where you reflect and make your decisions, whether it's the office, you know, kitchen, the garden or the bedroom or whatever. hat is conducive to you making the right decisions or you are full of distractions, it sounds really easy when you want to consciously reflect at the top of your mind, declutter your decision space. The one architect who controls your decisions effectively is what I call decision friction. It's like a mental speed bump for the mind. Of decision friction,  what you're doing is you're intentionally interrupting your thought before forming a judgment. All you do there is simply put in a series of prompts, nudges and questions are putting the book people can look at like the five whys or ask yourself, I quite like this one.Wait, why?Why am I talking? Or well, why am I not listening? Wait and well five why it's going to be so small, simple things that people will remember. But in the moment, people can do that.  Andthen the third one: strategic slowness. Just remember, I've deliberately made this kind of rhyme again for people. Remember who knows? You lose, you lose out and you miss out.

But on the contrary, when you tune in, you know, you hear the voices that really matter. If you want to stand out as a leader, you really just need to tune in. So tune out, you lose out, even snippets. Remember that. And use the perimeters checklist. And this is when you've got more time. Use the perimeters checklist. Ask yourself am I liable to a decision error under these ten circumstances.

And we talk about ten parameters prompt in book. There's a checklist for people to look at as well. So very easy to look at. While I'm feeling particularly threatened in a certain environment and you think, okay, I'm vulnerable to bias, one two and three, okay. In those situations, here's what I do. The answers are there as well. I try to make it really easy for people to think of your decision space, control your decision space, have that decision friction and then ask yourself very simply, remember, try and remember. Tune out, lose out,  the great prompt.

Anita Brick: Thank you so much. That is very practical. It's also not very hard. It does take a deliberateness, but the things that you suggested, any of us can do those and that's good because we will not tune out all of the noise when we tune in, we give ourselves a much better chance of making a good decision.

And I think it took a lot of courage for you to write the book. Because in a world that is  inundated by information, noisy information, conflicting all the stuff that is vying for our attention, you took a stand, which is an unpopular stand, but it's definitely a different stand than most hate. So thank you for doing that and giving us another point of view that can have a very powerful impact on ourselves and much more broadly.

Nuala Walsh: Thank you very much. It's been fun. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. And I really appreciate you taking the time to read the book as well, so thoroughly.

Anita Brick: Of course, I enjoyed the book a lot, and it just made me think too, about how I live in the world. Thank you again and I really appreciate that you made time for us.I really do.

Nuala Walsh: Terrific. Thanks a lot.

Anita Brick: And thank you all for listening. This is Anita Brick, with CareerCast at Chicago Booth. Keep advancing.