WeChat***Wang Zhiyuan (ID: Z201440), Author: Wang Zhiyuan, Title Picture**: Visual China, you have to think twice.
Yes. Analyze the plan clearly and prepare the plan sufficiently, and the probability of success will increase; To this end, we analyze rationally and learn a lot of thinking models.
For example, if you have learned hindsight bias, you will be able to effectively identify and avoid potential problems; After learning about opportunity costs, when thinking about new projects, I think about whether it can bring other benefits.
I don't know when, when I opened social **, there was a burst of "model wind", and when I searched for decision-making, all kinds of simplified tools would come out; Charlie Munger turned the mental model into a simple product, a new way to depict decision-making.
However, I have to complain:Too many models can complicate thinking decisions and get bogged down in unnecessary annoyance.
On the weekend, I had coffee with a few old friends. A friend complained that the boss didn't know where to go to attend the business school, and after coming back, he insisted on doing the analysis according to the framework given by the tutor in the course, tossing the team for half a month, and no substantive results were obtained.
Therefore, the decision-making framework itself is a framework, and even the classics have limitations.
I've talked about things around me:
In October last year, my sister faced employment problems. She is a student in 985 School and is a high-achieving student in materials research, so she has more opportunities. State-owned enterprises are relatively stable; Foreign companies are directly given a Beijing hukou for entry, and the number of places is limited; Private companies have high salaries.
There are pros and cons. She's smart and calculates directly using the expected utility.
List the various utility values in the different options (e.g., money, work climate, career development, job challenges), then rate each utility and compare them.
When you're done, hit ** to show off in front of me and let me boast that she can make decisions.
I've also used the expected utility. The formula emphasizes the information of each choice and is incomparably precise; This is not the case with my sister, she does not list all the advantages and disadvantages, but personal tendencies.
In other words:Only the factors that come to mind are scored and some potential conditions that are not directly considered are ignored.
For example, she mentioned that state-owned enterprises are stable, with fixed commuting hours, and can use their spare time to take doctoral exams; I reminded her, did you ask your friends? Assuming no, decisions based solely on fantasy workplaces are inaccurate. Also, the interpersonal relationship of state-owned enterprises is more complicated, and you love to toss so much, and your personality type may not be stable.
After listening to this, she was stunned.
Say, "Isn't this only a great increase in trouble?" I said, "No."
The model is very good, don't forget, first, to have more information, the decision is clearer; Second, information is always flowing and can never be filtered. Since the expected utility is mentioned, it is necessary to consider the information of each choice comprehensively, and if this is not done, how can it be calculated and analyzed?
In the end, I said that I just graduated, considering that my career is very long, and I don't have to spend 1 or 2 years to explore, and I don't have to worry too much about thinking, and it is good to be able to do this.
What do I want to tell you through her? All models are standardized frameworks, and when a framework is used to analyze a problem, it is already bound by the framework, and the main difficulty in decision-making lies in this.
There are many decision-making models.
In the face of crowd intelligence, we rely on two large decision-making thinking models. One is called: "Layered Progressive Decision Model". That's the name I came up with.
To put it simply: from the "intuitive framework-empirical order-group and individual subconscious-conscious-behavior" constitute a system, which cannot be unloaded in the brain.
The intuitive framework is the reaction you give without thinking about the first time you see something; The order of experience is the sum of all kinds of previous experiences, including what you have learned and done since childhood, and how you think and decide.
What is group consciousness?
It usually involves social norms, mass behavior. For example: obey traffic rules, stop at red lights, go at green lights; Personal consciousness represents a person's unique ability to think about things, based on values and beliefs.
The last layer of behavior is the final product of the entire decision-making process.
A series of thought processes that help us make choices in the complex life and workAs long as it involves getting along with people from the outside, 80% of the behaviors are within this range.
For example, let's say you plan to open a café with Xiao Li. You will instinctively react, is he reliable? Will you lose money? Then, based on experience, what projects did Xiao Li work on before and how did he do? What is the reputation of his character, and how does he deal with failure cases.
Next, consider the opinions and inner feelings of the people around you; For example, what do other partners think of Xiao Li? What do you think of similar projects in the circle? After that, you will analyze Xiao Li's proposal, what are the risks, benefits, and whether the project will work?
In the end, we will convene a meeting to draw conclusions using various market models, and then decide whether to cooperate or ask more questions based on the analysis results.
The other is the Bayesian model. It treats all choices as a game of probability.
You can find a lot of its introduction online. Mathematically, the formula is: p(h|e) = [p(e|h) *p(h)] / p(e)；It looks extremely simple, but the meaning is profound.
The core idea is to use existing knowledge (prior probability) and newly obtained information (approximate probability) to calculate the probability that a hypothesis will be true under new evidence (posterior probability).
In a nutshell:Using mathematical methods to quantify people's intuition and experience helps us update our judgment of the probability of something happening based on new information.
That's a hassle. Why?
Imagine you're thinking about leaving your job to do a side hustle. Before leaving, based on all the information and intuition you currently have. You ask yourself: Does a side hustle make money? Is it stable? How to do it well?
To score a score, using Bayesian gives you a base probability, similar to and so on.
However, the situation will change after the actual departure. You'll have more energy to focus on your side hustle, and you'll be exposed to more new information, such as what the market is looking for and how others are doing it. In other words, new information can affect your estimation of the probability of success on your side hustle.
You will find that the probability of 80 points being estimated at the beginning is now higher or lower; After all, every feedback from the market and income will eventually affect your perception.
So, decisions are not set in stone.
With a deeper understanding of the side hustle, changes in market conditions, and the accumulation of personal experience, your judgment will continue to adjust. Pre-departure thinking is more based on assumptions, ** post-departure, thinking is based on actual experience and constantly updated information.
I don't know if it's clear enough.
To put it bluntly: the biggest bug in decision-making is the decision itself. There are more choices in front of us than we see, some choices will be ignored because of uncertainty, and those information that we have not paid attention to will bring new ideas for solving problems.
I used to ask the big guy for help, but I didn't dare to say anything, for fear of refusal, for fear of saying the wrong thing. Now directly throw a WeChat over, explain the problem needs clearly, and the other party will help if he wants to help, and forget if he doesn't help; This is straightforward and effective, because I may not have thought of all the feedback from the other party in advance.
This is the decision-making dilemma. What can be exchanged for practical action will not be deduced intracranially.
What do I want to express through the two models? In one sentence, it can be summed up:Actions generate new information, new information leads to new feedback, and new feedback increases confidence, which increases the probability of success.
A few days ago, after studying "Machine Learning", I realized that people are high-level agents, and human decision-making = old knowledge (experience) + Bayesian model + perceptual attributes.
In this formula:
Decision-making refers to the result of daily behavioral motivation, and old knowledge refers to the sum of all previous experiences in the present, which forms the basis of decision-making; Bayes, on the other hand, contains all the models you have learned, and the perceptual attributes are not too much to explain, and you must know a thing or two, similar to the seven emotions and six desires.
In the abstract, agents reflect the "philosophy of learning".
People's beliefs can be changed, we will not stubbornly rely on old beliefs to act, we will combine new observations with old beliefs to form a more informative belief.
Therefore, the knowledge learned is constantly being verified, adjusted, and slowly approaching the real results. However, human beings are more advanced (there is a perceptual part), so higher agents are sometimes not advanced at the rational level.
There are many post-90s entrepreneurs around me, and their cognitive level seems to be very high, and they talk non-stop about how to do traffic and how to sell goods. However, if you look at the results they get, they are very limited.
There is also a group of senior entrepreneurs who are full of confidence in a specific business, for example, to discuss the future trend of large models, what opportunities to grasp, and careful observation will find that they rarely practice in person.
Because both new and veteran players believe too much in personal reasoning, and it is easy to be bound by unproven ideas and old experiencesPeople who are truly knowledgeable will see the authenticity of the information as soon as they obtain it, take action, and refine their ideas in the process of verification.
From this, it can be said that there are very few people who know and act together.
There are also some people who think that they are not "the unity of knowledge and action" enough. In fact, according to the logic of agents, "the unity of knowledge and action" is by no means the consistency of "knowledge" and "action", and they should be stepping stones to renew each other.
"Knowledge" includes old knowledge (experience) and new knowledge (new information after verification, updated experience), and from the perspective of use, we often confuse "new information" and "new knowledge".
For example, some time ago, many people complained that they saw the A-share information in December last year and judged that it would fall in the next month, so they knew to sell it quickly; When asked again why they didn't throw? But they said they would wait and see.
Actually, that's not the real reason.
The behavior is very honest, they do accept some information that will fall, but the information does not completely dispel all concerns (old experience), and they do not have the confidence to sell.
There is no need to blame yourself, people are not superior in the face of reason; If the decision-making logic is given to the agent (AI), it will immediately give a decision-making plan, after all, once it receives new information, it will default to include the information in "prior knowledge", unlike people who are affected by perceptual factors (pros and cons of loss).
Therefore, information does not represent new knowledge, if you choose well (i.e., maximize utility and benefit), then it proves that you are acting rationally; If you make the wrong choice, your behavior is relegated to the category of "irrationality".
As I mentioned above, the "expected utility" assumption is premised on the fact that there are many choices in front of you, and you have to choose one of them, and those choices are made when you already have sufficient information.
Therefore, all decisions are reversible and irreversible. Reversible means that there is still a chance to make corrections, and irreversible means that there is no turning back.
Understand this, and you will find that Charlie Munger proposed 100 thinking models, almost all of which have limitations in decision-making, and all the assumptions of the models do not always hold true in the real world.
Every moment you open your eyes, you are receiving information, and information is constantly influencing decision-making, and the only thing you can do is to reduce the irreversible probability. So, I have very little internal friction, and my decisions are based on three principles:
1) If you can't figure it out, hit the road first.
I started writing five years ago, and looking back now, I didn't know that I could write two works (one to be published), let alone become the second curve of my career.
An entrepreneur who got the results quickly told me: why do you think so much, you have to use practice to verify what you know, and experience what will happen firsthand, which is much better than you are in a conference room, intracranial deduction, and listening to an afternoon class.
Many self-employed people feel that so-and-so's business is very low at every turn, and they feel that the sickle is in the leek; On the other hand, an adaptable predator may not be the fastest at the scythe, but may see what the group needs in a certain track first.
In other words, the best entrepreneurs (leaders) are not necessarily the ones who make the most accurate predictions or know how to calculate, and traditional business class sharing rarely tells you when you should stop analyzing.
Do you know? Time is a crucial factor. Don't be anxious about uncertainty, in fact, many of your judgments in the face of uncertainty are reversible, and this a priori information is more valuable than someone else's later analysis, unless you can make the information more accurate.
Even if you choose the wrong choice, the value is less clear, but at least it will drive you to more information that you haven't experienced.
2) Keep your mind open.
In the past, I naturally rejected accidents, and when accidents came, I had to digest them, and I had to rebuild my personal framework, which was very resource-intensive. Later, I figured out that if I blindly stick to the inherent framework, the mental world will become narrower and narrower, and I will not be able to truly integrate with reality.
Recently I have seen a common phenomenon that when you directly point out someone's inner fear and insecurity, he will instinctively say, "This is how I am", in fact, this moment of precaution is a good opportunity to think.
In today's age of conflicting opinions, opposing views are not so important, and if the other side can provide facts and concrete results, you will have the ability to deduce everything based on the information.
As the saying goes, in the business world, you think you understand correctly, but why don't you make money? I also posted a circle of friends a few days ago,Realistic people talk about facts, ideal people talk about opinions, and emotional people do what they want.
Don't misinterpret me.
When I say do what I want, I don't mean doing anything wrong, but being open-mindedSeeing other people's ideas and surprises as a novelty, a moment to explore the "different".
3) Accept grayscale moments.
Sometimes, you can't tell which choice is rational, best, and best.
I have a principle that I learned from the speech of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, namely:If your decision is reversible, act quickly. If it's irreversible, stop and analyze.
In reality, most decisions are "double doors", and you think God has closed it for you, but there is another solution. For major, irreversible one-way door decisions, I would stop and think deeply.
What is irreversible? Stop and think about it, there is nothing but life and death.
From a large perspective, it seems that the wrong choice of marriage and leveraged buying a house is irreversible, if you switch to a small perspective and think about it, you can get married and leave, and you can buy a house and sell it, which is nothing more than a loss, and it is more difficult to change.
To be more specific, in terms of importance, there are few things that are more important than life and death, you might as well bring the troublesome decision into this scenario, think, after 10 minutes, you have to choose two out of 5 things, what will you choose?
Well, I don't want to go on the road first, open my mind on the road, and add time to decision-making, these three points are the highest Bayesian model at the moment, and I can't make decisions more concisely.
In summary. Yes, actions generate positive messages.
If you want to make the future controllable, it is best to verify your ideas in advance. This kind of verification is self-tested, not hearsay. Of course, as for the decision to spend money, let's look at it the other way around.
WeChat*** Wang Zhiyuan (ID: Z201440), Author: Wang Zhiyuan This content is the author's independent view and does not represent the position of Tiger Sniff. Do not do without permission**, please contact hezuo@huxiu for authorizationcom
People who are changing and want to change the world are all on Tiger Sniff app