Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Cognitive Biases in Engineering Organizations

Jonathan Klein
November 17, 2014

Cognitive Biases in Engineering Organizations

Resources at jkle.in/biases. This talk was given at Velocity Barcelona in November 2014.

Jonathan Klein

November 17, 2014
Tweet

More Decks by Jonathan Klein

Other Decks in Science

Transcript

  1. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Who Am I? • Senior performance engineer at

    Etsy • I write the Etsy Site Performance Reports 3
  2. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Who Am I? • Senior performance engineer at

    Etsy • I write the Etsy Site Performance Reports • I like figuring out why we believe what we believe 3
  3. 4

  4. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases System 2 Allocates attention to the effortful mental

    activities that demand it, including complex computations 7
  5. “It was designed for right-handed users, but phones are usually

    rotated 180 degrees when held in left hands.” 12
  6. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein • Projection Bias • Planning Fallacy • Bandwagon

    Effect • Sunk Cost Fallacy • Hyperbolic Discounting • Fundamental Attribution Error 13
  7. 20

  8. 29

  9. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Projection Bias One thinks that others have the

    same priority, attitude or belief that one harbors oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case. 34
  10. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Projection Bias One thinks that others have the

    same priority, attitude or belief that one harbors oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case. Solution 34
  11. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Projection Bias One thinks that others have the

    same priority, attitude or belief that one harbors oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case. Solution Empathy 34
  12. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Projection Bias One thinks that others have the

    same priority, attitude or belief that one harbors oneself, even if this is unlikely to be the case. Solution Empathy Have people switch roles 34
  13. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Planning Fallacy The tendency for people to underestimate

    how long they will need to complete a task, even when they have experience of similar tasks over-running 36
  14. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Planning Fallacy The tendency for people to underestimate

    how long they will need to complete a task, even when they have experience of similar tasks over-running Solution 36
  15. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Planning Fallacy The tendency for people to underestimate

    how long they will need to complete a task, even when they have experience of similar tasks over-running Solution Prototyping 36
  16. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Planning Fallacy The tendency for people to underestimate

    how long they will need to complete a task, even when they have experience of similar tasks over-running Solution Prototyping Use information from similar ventures 36
  17. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Planning Fallacy The tendency for people to underestimate

    how long they will need to complete a task, even when they have experience of similar tasks over-running Solution Prototyping Use information from similar ventures “Planning poker” exercise 36
  18. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others 40
  19. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others Solution 40
  20. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others Solution Make decisions asynchronously 40
  21. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others Solution Make decisions asynchronously Ask for confidential feedback 40
  22. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others Solution Make decisions asynchronously Ask for confidential feedback Don’t prime the estimate 40
  23. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Bandwagon Effect The rate of uptake of beliefs,

    ideas, fads and trends increases the more that they have already been adopted by others Solution Make decisions asynchronously Ask for confidential feedback Don’t prime the estimate “Planning poker” exercise 40
  24. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Sunk Cost Fallacy A sunk cost is a

    retrospective (past) cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered 43
  25. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Sunk Cost Fallacy A sunk cost is a

    retrospective (past) cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered Solution 43
  26. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Sunk Cost Fallacy A sunk cost is a

    retrospective (past) cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered Solution Do some math 43
  27. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Sunk Cost Fallacy A sunk cost is a

    retrospective (past) cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered Solution Do some math At every point in the project, the ROI should still be positive 43
  28. 48

  29. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Hyperbolic Discounting Given two similar rewards, humans show

    a preference for one that arrives sooner rather than later. Humans are said to discount the value of the later reward, by a factor that increases with the length of the delay. 50
  30. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Hyperbolic Discounting Given two similar rewards, humans show

    a preference for one that arrives sooner rather than later. Humans are said to discount the value of the later reward, by a factor that increases with the length of the delay. Solution 50
  31. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Hyperbolic Discounting Given two similar rewards, humans show

    a preference for one that arrives sooner rather than later. Humans are said to discount the value of the later reward, by a factor that increases with the length of the delay. Solution Deliberately stop and do an estimation exercise 50
  32. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Hyperbolic Discounting Given two similar rewards, humans show

    a preference for one that arrives sooner rather than later. Humans are said to discount the value of the later reward, by a factor that increases with the length of the delay. Solution Deliberately stop and do an estimation exercise Consider implications for future developers 50
  33. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Experimental Outcomes Researchers found that children who were

    able to wait longer for the preferred rewards tended to have better life outcomes: • SAT Scores • Educational attainment • Body Mass Index (BMI) 55
  34. 56

  35. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Fundamental Attribution Error People's tendency to place an

    undue emphasis on internal characteristics to explain someone else's behavior in a given situation, rather than considering external factors. 58
  36. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Fundamental Attribution Error People's tendency to place an

    undue emphasis on internal characteristics to explain someone else's behavior in a given situation, rather than considering external factors. Solution Blameless postmortems 59
  37. 62

  38. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Which is More Dangerous? A disease that kills

    1,286 people out of every 10,000 A disease that kills 24.4 out of 100 64
  39. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Which is More Dangerous? ! A disease that

    kills 1,286 people out of every 10,000 A disease that kills 24.4 out of 100 65
  40. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Which is More Dangerous? ! A disease that

    kills 1,286 people out of every 10,000 A disease that kills 24.4 out of 100 65 Most people say this
  41. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Which is More Dangerous? ! A disease that

    kills 1,286 people out of every 10,000 A disease that kills 24.4 out of 100 65 Most people say this This is twice as bad
  42. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Dinner Plates Soup/Salad bowls Dessert plates Cups Saucers

    8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, 2 broken 8, 7 broken 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition None None 68 Set A: 40 Pieces Set B: 24 Pieces
  43. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Dinner Plates Soup/Salad bowls Dessert plates Cups Saucers

    8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, 2 broken 8, 7 broken 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition None None 69 Set A: 40 Pieces Set B: 24 Pieces
  44. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Three Groups in the Experiment ! 1. Shown

    both sets together 2. Shown only set A 3. Shown only set B 70
  45. @jonathanklein jkle.in/biases Dinner Plates Soup/Salad bowls Dessert plates Cups Saucers

    8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, 2 broken 8, 7 broken 8, all good condition 8, all good condition 8, all good condition None None 73 Set A: 40 Pieces Set B: 24 Pieces
  46. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Subscriptions to The Economist 1. A web-only subscription

    for $59 2. A print-only subscription for $125 3. A web + print subscription for $125 75
  47. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Subscriptions to The Economist ! 1. A web-only

    subscription for $59 2. A print-only subscription for $125 3. A web + print subscription for $125 76 Useless
  48. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Subscriptions to The Economist ! 1. A web-only

    subscription for $59 2. A print-only subscription for $125 3. A web + print subscription for $125 77 16% 0% 84%
  49. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Subscriptions to The Economist ! 1. A web-only

    subscription for $59 2. A print-only subscription for $125 3. A web + print subscription for $125 78
  50. jkle.in/biases @jonathanklein Subscriptions to The Economist ! 1. A web-only

    subscription for $59 2. A print-only subscription for $125 3. A web + print subscription for $125 79 16% 84% 68% 32%