# data[].attributes.headline
Chelesea: Expert Bias and the Ladder of Influence

# data[].attributes.subject
Chelesea: Expert Bias and the Ladder of Influence

# data[].attributes.body
This video explains the basic principle of the Ladder of Influence and how we can draw vastly different conclusions when presented with the same information.  I find perspective fascinating and differing perspectives frequently at the core of conflict. This blogpost also explores ‘expert bias’ a syndrome that may be epidemic in higher education.  We are encouraged to be subject matter experts; however this may be to the detriment of ongoing education and making connections with those that may not echo our ivory tower, upper echelon, expertise.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Ladder of Inference is a concept developed by the late Harvard Professor Chris Argyris, to help explain why people looking at the same set of evidence can draw very different conclusions.

The difference comes from the idea that, based on their beliefs, people 'choose' what they see in amongst a mass of information.

More on that later, but first off, who fancies an experiment?

If I was being a bit hipster I could claim it as a Randomised Control Trial (RCT if you are uber hipster), but I'll stick to plain old 'experiment'.
Try this experiment at home or in the office:

1. Go to twitter and find a hashtag for a recent conference or seminar where people have been busily tweeting,

2. The topic doesn't really matter, but something reasonably linked to your area of interest/business might be useful,

3. Search on the hashtag so that you can see a good selection of tweets - about 100 will do,

4. Copy the 100 tweets and paste them into a document. The aim is to have about 3 pages of written text for people to look at (pretty straightforward so far),

5. Now find two Test Subjects (people). Colleagues with very different views on the world would be good. Mr Grumpy and Miss Sunshine or Cruella de Vil and Ronald McDonald (we all have them).

6. Now ask the Test Subjects to independently review the tweets and provide you with a summary of the key points emerging from the Twitter stream,

7. Just to make it interesting you could ask the Test Subjects to summarise their findings in no more than 5 tweets,

8. Sit back and wait for the results.

9. If you are feeling ambitious, you could repeat this experiment a number of times, with different Test Subjects, different collections of tweets or a different context.

10. For example choose Test Subjects (people) with a very similar outlook. Before they do the analysis, brief one that you thought seminar was excellent, and the other that you thought it was rubbish (sneaky!).

The Results. I've not formally run this experiment (yet) but I have experienced a fair number of the summaries of Twitter conversations that people like to share about conferences. Storify Twitter summaries are almost mandatory for public sector conferences nowadays.

What has intrigued me is just how differently people can interpret and present the summary of the discussion at the same event. I appreciate that there will be a certain amount of bias and pushing of corporate messages. If your organisation is running the conference/seminar you will probably want to push key messages - dissenting voices and challenge probably isn't something you are going to 'share' given the choice.

However, it is the variation in the summaries from the apparently independent/unbiased people that intrigues me. I'm sure that people will have very good intentions, but I do think there is a fair bit of 'expert bias' going on in these situations.

This is something neatly illustrated by The Ladder of Inference developed by Chris Argyris and had also been used by Peter Senge in his book The Fifth Discipline.
The basic idea is that:

When presented with a range of information/data/facts, we select what fits with a belief we already hold about that situation.

All other information is ignored.

We make our decision on the 'evidence' we have selected (evidence based decisions are always the best).

Our beliefs become stronger based on that good decision we have made (a feedback loop).

In the future, when we look at information/data/facts, and what we select will be influenced our now more strongly held beliefs.

Both of the graphics I've used in this post illustrates the concept very effectively. If you would prefer here is a 3 min video, The Ladder of Inference Created Bad Judgement, from Edward Muzio.

Am I suffering from 'Expert Bias'? I've been worrying for a while that I'm a candidate for The Ladder of Inference. It's not just how I view the tweets from a seminar, but just about everything where I'm presented with data/information/facts.

Everything I've ever experienced informs how I see things and gives me an 'expert bias'. You might now be thinking, 'that would never happen to me....' (oh lucky you.....)

At one level it could be argued that I should stop getting anxious and get over it - that's the job, to make sense of complicated information. At another level I would like to put some rigour into what I'm doing, how do I perform a cross check?

The work from Chris Argyris suggests a process of 'climbing down' The Ladder of Inference. Going back down into the facts and looking at all them more closely, attempting to remove your bias. The Edward Muzio video summarises this as:

Climb down the Ladder of Inference (a lovely metaphor)

Question your Assumptions and Conclusions (with a trusted colleague)

Seek Out Contrary Data (to test what you are seeing)

These are all good suggestion, but quite hard to do. What if you have no idea of how you are biased? The topic of unconscious bias, how you recognise it, and how you deal with it is helpfully the focus HR Training Programmes in many organisations, linked to things like equalities and diversity work, but helpful in so many other areas.

At the end of the day, if we just get as far as recognising there is such a thing as The Ladder of Inference and Expert Bias, I think that's a pretty good start. It might help me when I'm reading the next tweet Storify.
So, What's the PONT?

1. People can interpret the same set of 'facts' in different ways.

2. Recognising it as Expert Bias, Unconscious Bias or The Ladder of Inference is helpful as it can help prevent wrong conclusions and bad decisions.

3. Once your bias is recognised, you need to take steps to 'Climb Down The Ladder'. It's always better to fall from a low step.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ladder of Inference. Climbing Down from Expert Bias

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Ladder of Inference is a concept developed by the late Harvard Professor Chris Argyris, to help explain why people looking at the same set of evidence can draw very different conclusions. The difference comes from the idea that, based on their beliefs, people 'choose' what they see in amongst a mass of information.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a favorite article of mine.  The LOI is so relevant because we will continue to select the data that conforms with our assumptions and preferred actions. We have to learn to climb back down and question the data we are selecting and what assumptions we are making.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ladder of Inference - The Systems Thinker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ow we act depends on how we understand the situation we are in. Our understandings often seem obvious to us, as if they were given by the situation itself. But people can come to very different understandings, depending on what aspects of the situation they notice and how they interpret what is going on.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm very visual and I figured a picture fit as the 'etc' on the homework instructions! There were a lot of images available, but I selected this one because of the way it calls out beliefs and assumptions. It seems to me that these are an important connection between Argyris' conception of the ladder of inference and RSD. The way RSD builds in silent reflection, scaffolding to prevent sub-group formation, structured sharing of positionality, and listening for interest and understanding are all things that uncover our own beliefs and assumptions while allowing us to understand where others are 'coming from'.

# data[].attributes.body
I found this video which uses a sports' framing to explain the ladder of inference. It uses the example of a manager texting during an annual meeting, and asks colleagues to climb the ladder of inference to simulate the level they had reach in making inferences about the texting manager's behaviour. I think the ladder of inference may be relevant to a discussion on RSD as it creates a framework that encourages listening and not jumping to conclusions about others' behaviour before we have more information.  It is a useful too to ground difficult conversations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zenger Folkman Coaching Games – The Ladder of Inference

# data[].attributes.body
I came across this article where the author presents a new model for communication called LENS. Students who seek to study abroad are the poplation this tool aims to assist. In explaining the tool the author covers other models to include the ladder of inference. I see the ladders relevance as the author states in her critique: as a method to bring about self-reflection. If as RSD facilitators we do not develop our own skills in self reflection, then we will be at a loss to guide others. I liked the comparison and background of the other models as well.

# data[].attributes.body
I thought this video explained the Ladder of Inference in a succinct and engaging way. The video played out a real-world scenario one might experience in a workplace, utilizing the example as a way to explain the content in a potentially relatable way. I plan to share this video with my teammates and broader organization - love it!

# data[].attributes.headline
Becky E: YouTube Video "Rethinking Thinking"

# data[].attributes.subject
Becky E: YouTube Video "Rethinking Thinking"

# data[].attributes.body
In summary, the rungs are a process of how we observe the world and process that information. In short, the ladder is 1. observation, 2. filter, 3. interpretation, 4. assumptions, 5. our own conclusions, 6. affirm/re-evaluate beliefs, and 7. respond/action. In the example of the video, the real life example demonstrated how to 'short circuit' our ladder of inference.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dana P- HarvardX: Using the Ladder of Inference (not burning oil, not sure why this picture comes up, sigh...)

# data[].attributes.subject
Dana P- HarvardX: Using the Ladder of Inference (not burning oil, not sure why this picture comes up, sigh...)

# data[].attributes.body
I think the Ladder of Inference is relevant to RSD because it's application can cause us to slow down and examine the inferences we make from the data we use. In emotionally charged discussions, the LoI model acts as an internal mirror-- reflecting back to us unconscious "shark jumps" we made in reaching our conclusions.

# data[].attributes.headline
This video shows us how we can be locked on our own thinking by making meaning in a situation too quickly.  

# data[].attributes.subject
This video shows us how we can be locked on our own thinking by making meaning in a situation too quickly.  

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Sigmoid Curve Consulting Group - Experts in Change Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Organizational Learning Tool: The Ladder of Inference

# data[].attributes.body
This video talked about each of the steps in the ladder and uses a good example of how it works. I teach a lot of unconscious bias training and it relates a lot to some of those concepts as well. (Susan)

# data[].attributes.headline
I chose Brene Brown's short on "Blame" as a representative example. I believe reflecting on how quickly we move up the Ladder of Inference (from select data to assumptions...huge leap!) can help me intentionally slow the process down and give space for alternative explanations. This is especially important for RSD as we seek to understand and honor multiple perspectives. I can relate to how quickly BB assumes that her husband's lateness "caused" her to spill her coffee on her white pants! Totally!

# data[].attributes.subject
I chose Brene Brown's short on "Blame" as a representative example. I believe reflecting on how quickly we move up the Ladder of Inference (from select data to assumptions...huge leap!) can help me intentionally slow the process down and give space for alternative explanations. This is especially important for RSD as we seek to understand and honor multiple perspectives. I can relate to how quickly BB assumes that her husband's lateness "caused" her to spill her coffee on her white pants! Totally!

# data[].attributes.body
This video provided a succinct overview of the Ladder of Inference. and how this practice helps you test assumptions about what you think you understand about a situation.  It is very easy for us to see a situation and quickly reach conclusions about what is happening without really realizing that we are automatically filtering data through our past experiences, values and beliefs. When each person in a group reacts to an event using their own experiences to interpret events, tensions and conflict will likely result. The Ladder of Inference is a simple took that we can use to help us understand the perspectives that emerge during RSD.  Using the Ladder of Inference can help us understand how past experiences color, frame, and shape interactions with other people.  Without reflection and inquiry, how can we get people on the same page so that they can begin making sense of a situation together?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ladder of inference - safesearch.norton.com Video Search Results

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.

# data[].attributes.headline
Angie's YouTube Video on Coaching Games: Ladder of Influence

# data[].attributes.subject
Angie's YouTube Video on Coaching Games: Ladder of Influence

# data[].attributes.body
This video shows a "competition" on a ladder of influence and how competitors dealt with a scenario.  The video highlights how we can become caught up in "diagnosing" and therefore competing to get to the top of the ladder as quickly as possible. That, of course is a bad practice when facilitating RSD sessions because facilitators need to withhold judgement and assumptions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zenger Folkman Coaching Games – The Ladder of Inference

# data[].attributes.body
REMEMBER TO ADD YOUR NAME

# data[].attributes.body
Please add a new POST by double-clicking on the white space OR clicking the "PLUS" pink circle at the lower right corner. Once you have a new post space, add the link to the video or article you found in your post. Then,  provide a brief explanation of why you found it helpful in the text box area.