Don McMinn

The American Psychological Association defines fundamental attribution error (FAE) as the tendency to overestimate the relationship between people’s behavior and their character and underestimate the relationship between their behavior and their circumstances. It also suggests that when we judge ourselves we tend to do the opposite: we underestimate the role that character plays and overestimate the influence of circumstances. 

When someone else messes up we are quick to judge him and attribute his problem to something wrong with his character; we tend to think that people do bad things because they are bad people. But when we look at ourselves in the same situation, rather than blame our character, we consider our circumstances.  

For instance, imagine you’re driving down the road when a reckless driver cuts you off and speeds forward, barely missing several other cars. You immediately think he’s a jerk, has anger problems, or may be inebriated; you assume his bad behavior is due to poor character. But if you knew that the driver has an injured person in the backseat and is rushing to the hospital, your judgment is informed by his circumstances, and you judge him differently.

When a colleague is late to a meeting we tend to label it as a character flaw (he’s inconsiderate, disorganized, self-absorbed); but when we’re late to a meeting, we justify it based on circumstances (our previous meeting ran late, traffic is bad, we had to finish a conversation with a customer). We tend to cut ourselves slack while holding others 100% accountable for their actions.

Sometimes behavior is linked to character and sometimes behavior is linked to circumstances. FAE simply suggests that when judging other people, we have a cognitive bias—we default to the behavior/character link and when we judge ourselves we favor the behavior/circumstances link. 

To correct for this error it’s helpful to invent a story that creates a positive explanation for people’s behavior. For instance, the next time someone cuts you off in traffic, think: “I hope he makes it to the hospital in time.” When someone doesn’t return your call, instead of thinking “He’s an inconsiderate jerk” think of some good reasons why he hasn’t called you back: perhaps he’s struggling with a major life-issue, or traveling for work, or he honestly just forgot to return your call.

We should presume benevolence toward others; we should choose to imagine a noble intent. 

We need to give each other a break.

Here’s a short video on the subject created by the UT Austin McCombs School of Business. 

In the past ten years I’ve led groups of friends on annual trips to Paris, London, Europe, the Mediterranean, Baltic States, Russia, and North Africa. We’ve never had a malfunction or bad experience; just memorable, life-enhancing moments.

I invite you to join me on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to one of the great historical and geographical countries in the Southern Hemisphere—Peru. We’ll start our trip in Lima, then travel to Cusco—the gateway to the Sacred Valley and home to the Inca civilization. We’ll visit Machu Picchu, one of the wonders of the ancient world. Then we’ll travel to the Amazon Rainforest and spend three days at the Inkaterra Reserva Amazonica lodge in the diverse Puerto Maldonado area. (In 2013, it was selected by National Geographic Traveler magazine was one of the world’s 25 best eco-lodges.) We’ll travel on airplanes, trains, buses, vans, boats, and shoes.

Mary and I took this trip in July, 2018. It was one of our favorite trips of all time (we’ve been to 47 countries). We always felt safe, the accommodations are elegant and authentic, the food is world-renowned, the geography is diverse (metropolitan Lima, the Andes mountains, Amazon Rainforest), and Peruvians are friendly—the trip was incredible.   

This trip was originally scheduled for May 6-15, 2020 but due to the coronavirus it has been rescheduled to May 12-21, 2021.

It’s been said that one of the joys of traveling is not only where you go but who you go with and who you meet along the way. This tour group will be limited to 50 interesting ladies and gentlemen who travel well—friends of mine who enjoy exploring great places. 

Travel takes time and money, but it’s worth the investment. You’ll be stretched and challenged, and you’ll learn more about the world in which you live and the life you live in the world. 

I hope you’ll join me on this memorable trip to Peru. 

Here’s a brochure about the trip. Peru-Brochure-2021

Don McMinn

[reminder]Questions about the trip?[/reminder]

Most people don’t take the time to think systematically about the future. Leaders do. — Burt Nanus

Good leaders always think about the future of their organization and how it can be better than the present. They are obsessed with “seeing” that which does not exist. These “unseen improvements” are prompted by the mission of an organization and fleshed out through vision and goals.

Let’s start with definition of terms.  

• Mission defines why the organization exists. It seldom changes and is usually never completed. It answers the question, “Why do we exist?” It is typically one sentence or a short paragraph. 
• Vision gives the organization direction and defines its uniqueness (how it differs from other organizations with the same mission). It answers the question, “How will we fulfill our mission?” Vision is malleable and doable. An organization usually has multiple vision statements, all in support of the mission.
• Goals are action steps that will ultimately help fulfill each vision statement. Goals usually include numbers and dates—metrics that can be measured.

Sometimes it’s difficult to tell the difference between a vision and a goal. For instance, consider each of these statements; is it a vision or a goal?

• Get everyone in the U.K. online by the end of 2012 (Martha Fox’s statement when she was appointed the U.K.’s first digital champion).
• Build 150 affordable, green, storm-resistant homes for families living in the Lower 9^th Ward of New Orleans (from Make It Right, a non-profit started by Brad Pitt). 
• The United States should commit itself, before this decade is out, to landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth. (President Kennedy, proposal to Congress on May 25, 1961)
• In the next 24 months, double the amount of products we offer. 

I think each statement could be considered either a vision or a goal, and each will serve its organization well as long as it contributes toward the mission. View vision and goals as a continuum of activity. 

Vision and goals are similar because they both:

• Address the future, not the past or present.
• Aspire to a future that is better than the present.
• Refer to things that can be accomplished, not just high ideals.

Vision and goals can differ in that:

• Vision speaks to broader aspirations and may take longer to accomplish.
• Goals are very concrete and most can be accomplished in months, not years.
• Vision answers the question: What can we do that will make our organization effective? Goals answer the question: What can we do next to make our organization effective?

My main purpose in writing this post is to extol the value of goals and show their importance. They are, perhaps, the key element in the future-continuum of an organization (mission—vision—goals). 

Consider:

• Without goals, mission and vision will not be accomplished. Once you’ve determined mission and vision, the work is yet to begin. There is a subtle but critical gap between vision and goals; if you don’t connect the two, your organization will stall.
• Sometimes vision statements are elusive and difficult to codify, in which case goals can provide needed stimulus. The author of Ecclesiastes wrote, “Whatever your hands find to do, do it with all your might.” When you’re fully engaged in an organization and see something you can do that will be beneficial, do it. The actions may even help clarify vision.
• Sometimes valid vision statements become too familiar and common, which can lead to passivity. Goals will provide a sense of urgency and activate dormant resources. They serve as organizational steroids.
• Consider the adage, “It’s easier to steer a moving ship than one that’s sitting in the dock.” Goals will get the organization “moving” and make steering easier. 
• If goals are in sync with the mission, there is no downside to pursuing them. All resources required will be well spent.

As a leader, always be able to complete these sentences. 

Next week, our organization will make progress by ____________________.

In the next six months, our organization will make progress by ______________.

In the next two years, our organization will make progress by _______________.

Shorter time frames will be goals; longer time frames will sound more like vision. Both are healthy and will improve the organization.

I have big plans for my five-year-old grandson, Benjamin. Last summer I taught him to swim. We’re working on the alphabet, math, spatial recognition, emotional intelligence, memory, and other subjects.

I’ve added a new item to the curriculum: I want to teach Benjamin how to listen. It’s a critical life-skill that some people never learn. I want him to excel at it. 

Here are some basic thoughts relative to listening. I haven’t figured out how to teach these to a preschooler, but I’m going to try.

There’s a difference between hearing and listening.

Hearing is an involuntary, physiological function. Unless you’re hearing-impaired, it just happens. Just like your kidneys function without your permission, your auditory system is constantly on, so you’re hearing every moment of your life.  

Listening occurs when your mind chooses to focus on a particular part of what your auditory system is receiving. Listening is active; you decide when to listen and what to listen to. It’s like a toggle switch that you can flip on or off. Of all the various sounds you’re hearing at any moment, you choose to focus on some of them and try to make sense of and find meaning in what you hear. If you choose to focus on what a person is saying, you try to garner meaning from her words and sentences.

Listening is difficult because it requires intense focus and concentration. At any moment your mind can choose to focus on stimuli from any of your five senses—what you see, feel, taste, touch, or hear—or any random thought your mind conceives of. Your thoughts can also be affected by your emotions. Even after choosing to focus on something you are hearing (as opposed to something you’re seeing, etc.) your mind can get distracted and drift. 

Listening is a skill that must be developed. 

Just like we’re not born with the skill to play tennis, or fly a plane—these skills must be developed—listening is a skill that must be cultivated. It’s not a natural endowment. On a scale from 1-10 (1 being we are inept at listening, 10 being we have advanced listening skills) we all start out in life at level one. Sadly, some people stay in the low digits their entire life. 

It takes conscientious effort to develop a skill. A curriculum helps, as does a coach. But most of us have never taken a considered approach to developing listening skills. Our current skill level was most likely developed through trial and error and fragmented bits of instruction. 

There must be a better way. 

Why is listening so important?

We learn by listening. 

All five of our senses are entry-ports for information and stimuli that we use to learn about our world. Indeed, they are the only source of information. Second only to seeing, listening is the primary faculty for learning. But as mentioned in the previous section, just hearing is insufficient; we must listen—focus and engage the mind—to learn. 

Listening is essential for healthy relationships.

The health of all relationships (individual and corporate) rises and falls on communication, which is best expressed through dialogue, which involves both talking and listening. Productive talking is also a skill that must be developed, but listening is the more difficult of the two.  

Author David Augsburger suggests that, “Being heard is so close to being loved that for the average person, they are almost indistinguishable.”

Professor Ralph Nichols wrote, “The most basic of all human needs is the need to understand and be understood. The best way to understand people is to listen to them.”

Relative to healthy dialogue, I highly value Stephen Covey’s statement, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.” First listen, then talk. 

Good communication is the oil that lubricates the working parts of relationships and active listening is the foremost component. 

Suggestions for improved listening

When someone is talking, focus on listening to what he is saying. Don’t spend those moments developing your response to his comments or crafting the next thing you want to add to the conversation. 

Don’t interrupt. Doing so devalues the speaker and infers that what you want to say is more important. 

After listening, sometimes it’s helpful to repeat to the speaker what you think was said: confirm that you understand correctly. But don’t do this mechanically or automatically or it will appear contrived and patronizing.    

The best example of good listening I’ve ever seen was hearing a conversation among members of the Juilliard string quartet. Click here to read the post.