Join 📚 Fabien's Highlights
A batch of the best highlights from what Fabien's read, .
The Center for Creative Leadership, an executive-education company, developed a technique called “situation behavior impact” to help leaders be more precise and therefore less arrogant when giving feedback. This simple technique reminds you to describe three things when giving feedback: 1) the situation you saw, 2) the behavior (i.e., what the person did, either good or bad), and 3) the impact you observed. This helps you avoid making judgments about the person’s intelligence, common sense, innate goodness, or other personal attributes. When you pass blanket judgments, your guidance sounds arrogant.
Suppose you are using two predictors that are strongly predictive of the outcome—their correlations with the outcome are .60 (PC = 71%) and .55 (PC = 69%). Suppose also that the two predictors are correlated to each other, with a correlation of .50. How good would you guess your prediction is going to be when the two predictors are optimally combined? The answer is quite disappointing. The correlation is .67 (PC = 73%), higher than before, but not much higher. The example illustrates a general rule: the combination of two or more correlated predictors is barely more predictive than the best of them on its own.
Noise
Daniel Kahneman, Olivier Sibony, and Cass R. Sunstein
In the aftermath of the investigation the report is made available to everyone. Airlines have a legal responsibility to implement the recommendations. Every pilot in the world has free access to the data. This enables everyone to learn from the mistake, rather than just a single crew, or a single airline, or a single nation. This turbo-charges the power of learning. As Eleanor Roosevelt put it: ‘Learn from the mistakes of others. You can’t live long enough to make them all yourself.’
Black Box Thinking
Matthew Syed
...catch up on these, and many more highlights
Readwise