I thought I’ve already made up my mind! Stuck in a deliberative mindset?

I get frustrated with my occasional indecisiveness when it comes to some important decisions! At times I would even say I am a firm advocate of the “Assertive Right #4: You have the right to change your mind” from the assertive rights listed by Manuel J. Smith in his brilliant book on assertiveness “When I say no, I feel guilty”. 

Recently I’ve had an A-ha moment that has helped me to make better sense of my indecisiveness. I’ve realized that at times I just get stuck in a “deliberative mindset” and fail to move into a “implemental mindset”.

These two mindsets* were coined by Dr. Peter Gollwitzer, a leading researcher in the area of goal pursuit – followers of this blog would recognize the name from the post on implementation intentions. According to Dr. Gollwitzer, there are unique mindsets associated with how people go about pursuing goals.

Deliberative mindset refers to a cognitive orientation in which people evaluate and select a goal/alternative from many alternate goals/options that could be pursued at a given point in time. Say, when you’re trying to decide if you should stay with your current position or put yourself forward for that senior-level promotion.

This mindset leads people to consider relevant information in a careful and balanced manner. What are the advantages and disadvantages of my current position and those of the new position? Things to consider: more responsibility, more involvement in strategic decision, more visibility in the organization, better pay, new team, longer hours,  etc…

The desire to be accurate (unbiased) is stronger when in a deliberative mindset and people spend sometime in this mindset as they weigh pro’s and con’s of each option. Research also shows this might decrease the positive illusions we normally entertain about ourselves – such as, our ability to control uncontrollable events; being better than others; or our vulnerability to risks.

In contrast, in implemental mindset, people are concerned with the specific planning on how to implement the chosen goal. Let’s say you’ve decided forego the promotion option and to stay in your current position. The focus is now on the thoughts and actions necessary to achieve the outcome that you’ve decided to pursue (How can I make the best out of my current position?; How can I increase my visibility in the current position?; What are some ways I can improve at what I am doing to make it more fulfilling?)

Different to the deliberative mindset, implemental mindset is associated with an information search biased toward the chosen option, due to a focus on planning and action (e.g., great things about my current team; flexibility in managing projects; time I’ll have for other things). The determination to achieve chosen outcomes may foster a belief in one’s ability to realize these outcomes and thoughts that reflect the desire to feel good about the decision (This position allows me to make a bigger difference in the organization; I can be more successful with my current team;  etc..)

Now, “normally” the decision-making process starts with being in a deliberative mind-set; then making a decision after careful deliberation; and then moving to a implemental mindset where now it’s all about believing in the decision you’ve made and moving forward with it. But what happens when you’re stuck in a deliberative mindset? You relapse back to considering the alternatives again and again! So you find yourself considering the advantages of the promotion and seeing it as an alternative again?

What happens then?

• You spend time and energy that would be better spent on pursuing your chosen option, on deliberating between the two options.
• You start questioning the “goodness” of your previous decision and this reflects on your commitment to your goal – this is especially detrimental if the other option is not viable anymore (e.g., someone else is already promoted to the other position)
• Even if you end up with the same decision again, the subjective feeling of being convinced of it decreases (i.e., during the second or third round of deliberation you might come up with additional con’s to it) that could influence your motivation
• If it is a recurring pattern, this might decrease your confidence in your ability to make good decisions.

How to go about it?

• Spend enough time in the deliberative mindset at the beginning, comparing different options
• Document the decision process by writing down the pro’s and con’s of different options - I know people who do that on an excel sheet.
• Once you decide write down the rationale behind your final decision in a narrative/paragraph form than in bullet form. Doing so would help with sense-making if you were to revisit your decision.
• If you find yourself “relapsing” back to the deliberative mindset, refer to your notes and remind yourself there is no value in reconsidering the different options again - unless there is new information. Refocus on your chosen goal and think of mentally switching a dial that reads: Activate implemental mindset!

This might mean some training for people who in general experience indecisiveness. But like other cognitive structures or process you can modify this tendency. If you’re in that group, practice it even with minor decisions (e.g., which restaurant to go, which food to order, etc.,).

What if you generally don’t have propensity towards indecisiveness but find yourself getting stuck in the deliberative mindset with some decisions? This might be a sign of not being able to let go off the other alternatives and deserves some exploration.

• Could there be some hidden benefits and costs you haven’t considered?
• Have you taken the emotional pro’s and con’s in your deliberations in addition to the more rational/factual ones?
• Did you take a “What should I want/do?” or “What do I really want?” perspective? 

At work or in private life, professionals have to make a lot of decisions - taking more responsibility and being more reflective about the decision-making process could only lead to better decisions.

* Mindset refers to a cognitive orientation characterized by certain ways of processing information or solving tasks. While one mindset can facilitate solving a particular task, let’s say choosing the best option among many others; it can hamper solving other tasks, such as persisting on the already chosen alternative.

Self-handicapping: Are you sabotaging yourself to avoid evaluation or failure?

I was watching an old episode of Grey’s Anatomy – my only TV addiction – where a lawyer who’s about to take the Bar exam in a few days for the fifth time is brought in for severe burns in her hand. She says that before she took some practice tests, she wanted some tea so she put on a pot of water, set the timer and after 30 minutes the smoke alarm went off. When taking the pot off the stove she held on to it too long leading to severe burns. She explains that she should have known better and that whenever she is studying for the Bar that she can't focus on anything with all the stuff that she has to know. She complains how bad it is with what happened to her hand with the exam coming up. With all the complaining you would think she would be happy about the news when the doctor says they can get her fixed up and she'll be fine and can take the test, but instead one can clearly see the shock on her face… Well, in the end it becomes clear that she couldn’t stand taking the risk of failing yet another Bar exam:

“Can you imagine failing the Bar five times? It's absurd and pathetic. I can't sit for two and a half days to prove again to everyone how pathetic I am.”

This is a perfect example of the lengths people would go – although this one is quite extreme – to sabotage themselves prior to an important and potentially self-defining challenge. The name for this tendency in social psychology literature: self-handicapping. It is said to occur when

"people actively try to “arrange the circumstances of their behavior so as to protect their conceptions of themselves as competent, intelligent persons.” (Jones & Berglas, 1978, p.200)

Other examples:

• the athlete getting drunk the night before the game;
• the student who stays up too late studying so that the exhaustion impedes test performance;
• the employee who “gets” sick or sleep-deprived before important presentations;
• the expat/the immigrant who keeps on postponing taking that language course that would surely increase his chances of getting a promotion/job

Research has established that self-handicapping is motivated by uncertainty about one's ability or, more generally, anticipated threats to self-esteem. It is quite an ironic strategy when you think about it. The individual is so concerned about protecting self-esteem that they set themselves up for poor performance! The catch: they now have a good excuse for why they failed and it is not about their intelligence, talent or competence.

Here is what makes it an even more ironic and risky approach: Self-handicapping only offers a strategic advantage "in those settings where the attributional implications of performance are more important than the success of the performance itself" (Jones & Berglas, 1978; p. 201). Meaning, if the “why you failed” is more important than “you failed”. The outcome doesn’t change (you still underperform) but the explanation for failure doesn’t reflect on your intelligence, talent or competence.

Now, it works if that’s what is important or what you care about. But it is rarely the case that the outcomes does not matter! In other words, many times when we self-handicap to avoid self-evaluative feedback, the success of the performance really does matter.  The lawyer from Grey’s Anatomy won’t be able to avoid the failure even if she has the excuse of the “burned hand”. Yes, maybe it decreases the impact of the failure on her self-esteem because people will say “Oh, but she had a burned hand”, but really, she will know what really happened. And if she succeeds despite the burned hand – even a better outcome than passing the test without a burned hand!*

However, once the person uses self-handicapping over and over again, people stop being sympathetic about his excuses. Actually, self-handicapping is also self-deception focused strategy. It is not only targeting to protect your self-image in front of others, but you are also trying to deceive yourself into thinking “if you didn’t have that excuse you could have pulled it off successfully!” So you’re postponing putting yourself out there and give it all to see if you can actually pull it off. In other words, it is a reflection of the fear of not being able to make it if you were to give it your best.

How about you? Have you been tempted to literally create an excuse that would prevent you from being at your best? How did you rationalize your following suboptimal performance?  And of course, what would be a better strategy to deal with being evaluated or fear of failure?

Here’re a few ideas:

1. Awareness, awareness, awareness! I think this is my default advice for any kind of coping and adopting a better strategy. Be more mindful of your thinking and behavioral patterns.
2. Reframe the upcoming test/project/presentation also as a learning goal, rather than only as performance goal. Even if you fail – what can you learn from it?
3. The above strategy requires having a growth mindset, that is believing that with effort, focus and perseverance people can improve their performance and qualities. If you don’t have growth mindset (you can test it here), adopting it would open up great perspectives for you!
4. Make a it a choice! Weigh the costs and benefits of self-handicapping and then actively choose to (if you will) or not to do it. So, at least take the self-deception out own the equation. 

 *  Research shows that high self-esteem people self-handicap to enhance success, whereas low self-esteem people self-handicap to protect against the self-esteem threatening implications of failure.  

References:

Jones, E.E, & Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of under achievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.

Dweck, Carol. (2006). The New Psychology of Success.