Transcript
A (0:00)
I came to the Psychology of Human Misjudgment almost against my will. I rejected it until I realized that my attitude was costing me a lot of money and reduced my ability to help everything I loved. That's a quote by Charlie Munger, and that's what we're going to talk about today. The Psychology of Human Misjudgment. Welcome to the Knowledge Project. I'm your host, Shane Parrish. This podcast is all about learning from others, mastering the best of what they figured out so you can use their lessons in your life. Charlie Munger was a lawyer from Omaha who taught himself psychology because Harvard Law School refused to. Munger was the partner of Warren Buffett, and together they created one of the best track records the world has ever seen. And they use psychology to do it. In 1995, Munger formalized what he'd learned into a speech at Harvard. He called it the Psychology of Human Misjudgment. And in it he identified 24 psychological tendencies that cause systematic errors in thinking. Ten years later, at age 81, he rewrote it from memory, expanding it to 25 tendencies. I published the full updated version on FS Blog with his personal permission. We're the only website to my knowledge that has this permission to post it. I'll put the link in the description. The Psychology of Human Misjudgment is one of the most valuable frameworks for understanding human behavior ever created. It's Munger's map of how your brain systematically fools you and how to fight back. Let's dive in. Pattern one, Reward and Punishment Super Response tendency. Munger opened his talk with what he felt is one of the most important and underrated patterns, what he called reward and punishment super response tendency, otherwise known as just incentives and disincentives. Munger starts by saying, well, I think.
B (1:58)
I've been in the top 5% of my age cohort all my life and understanding the power of incentives, and all my life I've underestimated it and never a year passes, but I get some surprise that pushes my limit a little farther.
A (2:14)
Munger was perhaps one of the smartest people in business, someone who spent decades intensely studying this topic in his spare time. And he said he still underestimated how powerful incentives are. The simple maxim Munger came up with for this is never ever think about something else when you should be thinking about the power of incentives. Munger's favorite example of getting the incentives right is Federal Express. We had a whole episode on Fred Smith and Federal Express a few months ago, and this Story is part of it, but I'm going to repeat it here because it's so revealing about incentives. FedEx built their entire business model on one thing. Speed packages had to move through one central airport hub every single night, get sorted rapidly, and then get on planes heading to their final destination. The whole system depended on these night shift workers unloading and then loading these planes all in one overnight shift. By daybreak, all planes had to be in the air. But they always had issues getting it done before sunrise, night after night. At the end of the shift, there would still be planes on the ground, not loaded. They tried everything to speed things up. They tried threats, training programs, more supervisors. Nothing worked. Finally, somebody realized they were paying the workers by the hour. Think about Munger's statement from a minute ago. Never ever think about something else when you should be thinking about the power of incentives. What was FedEx incentivizing on the night shift when they paid workers by the hour to work slowly because if they stretched the job out, they'd get paid more money? A longer shift meant a bigger paycheck. Finally, someone had the obvious realization. Pay them by the shift so when they're done, they can just go home. The problem ended literally overnight. Another short and memorable example of incentive is never ask your barber if you need a haircut. One of Munger's most famous quotes is simple. Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. Munger offered three antidotes when it came to receiving advice from professionals. Number one, especially fear professional advice when it is especially good for the advisor. Number two, learn and use the basic elements of your advisor's trade as you deal with your advisor. And number three, double check, disbelieve or replace much of what you're told to the degree that seems appropriate. After objective thought, if someone's behavior doesn't make sense to you, ask yourself what the incentives are. Let's leave the final word to American novelist Upton Sinclair, who said, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it. Pattern number two Liking loving tendency the second tendency is liking loving tendency. We believe we trust and agree agree with people we like and if someone likes us, we tend to like them back. Once triggered, this creates three predictable consequences. First, you ignore their faults and comply with their wishes even when you otherwise wouldn't. You become blind to their flaws when made aware of them, you make excuses and rationalize them away. Second, you favor anything associated with the object of your affection. The this is why influencers are so Powerful. You don't just like the person. You like the things that they like. Their favorite restaurant, the products they use, even their political views. Third, you distort facts to maintain positive feelings. Your brain rewrites reality. You remember good times vividly and minimize or forget the bad times. This creates a feedback loop. Admiration causes liking, which causes more admiration, which causes more loving. This can spiral so much that people will deliberately destroy themselves to help what they love. In investing, this creates what Munger and Buffett call falling in love with your companies. You buy shares in a business, you study it thoroughly. You meet management. They're charismatic, they're articulate, and they tell you a compelling story. You start identifying with the company, and when somebody criticizes it, you feel personally attacked. Then the business starts deteriorating. Numbers weaken quarter by quarter. Competitors gain ground. Management makes questionable decisions. But you can't see it clearly anymore. Each quarter, you find reasons why the bad news isn't all that bad. It's temporary. You tell yourself they're investing for the long term. The market doesn't understand them like I do. Meanwhile, your capital evaporates because you can't see reality. And of course, this tendency isn't all bad. Munger points out that loving admirable people and ideas with special intensity is a huge advantage in life. Liking the right people and the right behaviors helps you become a better person. We're especially prone to like people similar to us. Those who share our beliefs, our interests and our attitudes. Also people who are physically attractive, popular or charismatic. We're especially vulnerable to people who make us feel special and compliment us. We also want to be liked. We don't speak the truth or openly question people because we fear the consequences. My friend Peter Bevelin writes, we don't want to be the person that stands out. This is one reason why people who are overly concerned about what others think prefer to be around like minded people. It's more comfortable than risking social disapproval. This gets in the way. We we agree with proposals from our political party and disagree with the other parties, even when they're identical proposals. This carries over into everything, not just politics. Stay objective on the issue and what you want to achieve. The moment you find yourself making excuses for obvious problems, that's a warning sign. Don't dismiss people because you don't like them. And remember, your enemy knows your faults better than you do. And in investing, ask yourself, if I didn't already own this, would I buy it today at the current price? If the answer is no, you might be driven by liking tendency and not rational analysis. Number three, disliking and hating tendency. The third pattern is the mirror image of liking loving tendency. And Munger recognized it's just as powerful, if not more so. When you dislike or hate something, three predictable distortions happen. One, you ignore the virtues in the object of your dislike, becoming blind to any good qualities, even obvious ones. Two, you dislike people, products and actions merely associated with what you hate. And three, you distort facts to facilitate hatred. Your brain literally rewrites reality to justify your negative feelings. And just like the love version, this creates a powerful feedback loop. Dislike breeds hatred, which breeds more dislike spiraling towards extremes. Munger gives a disturbing example in his talk. When the World Trade center was destroyed on 9 11, many Pakistanis immediately concluded the Hindus did it. Many Muslims immediately concluded the Jews did it. These weren't reasoned conclusions based on evidence. These were instant cognitive distortions driven by pre existing hatreds. The brain simply assigned blame to whoever was already hated. Munger's observation Such factual distortions often make mediation between opponents locked in hatred either difficult or impossible. Mediations between Israelis and Palestines are difficult because facts in one side's history overlapped very little with facts from the other sides. When hatred distorts your perception of basic reality, rational discussion becomes impossible. You're literally living in different factual worlds. Munger cites an old English Politics is the art of marshaling hatreds. Not hopes, not aspiration. Marshaling hatreds. Think about that for a second. This explains why negative political advertising works it it's easier to motivate people through hatred of an opponent than through love of your own candidate in investing. This tendency is just as dangerous as the love version. Maybe a company's CEO said something offensive. Maybe they compete with a company you already own. And maybe they just rub you the wrong way. Suddenly you can't see any virtues their successful new product. It's just luck. They're growing market share. It's unsustainable. Their innovation. It's a gimmick. The competitor you hate might be eating your lunch, but your hatred prevents you from seeing it, learning from it or responding effectively. The antidote here is to force yourself to see the virtues even in what you dislike. Ask yourself what is this person company idea doing? Well if you genuinely can't think of a single thing, that's the hating tendency at work almost every no one is 100% bad. The goal isn't to stop disliking things. That's impossible and probably not even desirable. The goal however is to not let disliking blind you to reality. Pattern 4 Doubt avoidance tendency. The fourth pattern is one of the most fundamental. We're programmed to remove doubt by reaching a decision. Think about why evolution would wire us this way. If you're a prey animal and a predator appears, the worst response is standing there and thinking, let me carefully weigh my options. You need to decide fast. It's fight or flight. The animal that takes too long becomes lunch. We're deeply uncomfortable with uncertainty. Our brains want resolution. We need to close the loop even if we don't have enough information. Munger writes that this tendency is so so pronounced in man. The behavior counter to it is required from judges and jurors. They're forced to delay decisions and wear a mask of objectivity. This mask helps create real objectivity because it forces you to keep your mind more open than it naturally wants to be. What triggers this tendency? Two things, really. Puzzlement and stress. When you don't understand something and you feel pressure, anxiety, or scarcity, the doubt avoidance tendency kicks high gear. Your brain desperately wants to resolve the uncertainty and will grab onto almost any answer. In business, this shows up constantly. You're in a meeting. A decision needs to be made. The data, it's incomplete. But sitting with uncertainty feels unbearable. So someone, often the highest status person, proposes a solution. And suddenly everyone feels a little bit of relief. Not because it's the right answer, but because it's an answer. So what's the solution? When the cost of failure is low, decide quickly. And when the cost of failure is high, slow down. That means allowing yourself to sit with uncertainty. When I talked to Daniel Kahneman about this, he said you delay intuition by focusing on the separate problems. Take the separate dimensions and really think about each dimension. Separate, separately and independently. Don't allow people to give the final judgment. Say, we will wait until we cover the whole thing. If you find a deal breaker, then you stop. But if you haven't found a deal breaker, wait until the end. Your decision is almost certainly going to be better. So be slow to form opinions. And once you do, they're very hard to change. When the stakes are high, move very slowly. Number five Inconsistency Avoidance tendency. Our brains conserve energy by being extremely reluctant to change. Once something is locked in, whether it's a habit, a conclusion, a commitment, or even an identity, your mind will fight to keep it consistent. Munger's observation here is brutal. Few people can list a lot of bad habits that they have eliminated. And some people cannot identify even one of these. Instead, practically everyone has a great many bad Habits he has long maintained, despite their being known as bad. You know your bad habits are bad. Everybody knows. But they persist anyway, because this tendency makes changing vastly harder than just continuing. Habits are like chains that slowly form small link by link, decision by decision. The terrifying part, they were too light to be felt before they became too strong to be broken. The first few times you do something, it feels like nothing. Just one cigarette, just one day. Skipping the gym, just one shortcut on quality. Each instance seems trivial, but you're forging a chain by the time you feel the weight. Breaking it requires enormous force. Ben Franklin understood this perfectly when he said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. But this doesn't apply to just habits. It locks in previous conclusions. Loyalties you've declared your reputational identity, commitments you've made. Once you've staked out a position, changing it feels like inconsistency, and your brain will do mental gymnastics to avoid that feeling. The more time, money, effort or pain you invest in something, the more you feel the need to continue, whether it's right or not. We don't want to waste our efforts, so we protect our ego and avoid the pain of accepting a loss. Psychologist Alan Teager wrote about the Vietnam War, the longer the war continued, the more difficult it was to justify the additional investments in terms of the value of possible victory. On the other hand, the longer the war continued, the more difficult it became to write off the tremendous losses without having anything to show for them. This plays out everywhere. A CEO keeps a disastrous hire because admitting the mistake feels worse than ongoing damage. You hold a declining stock because selling means facing a loss. I put $10,000 into this. I must prove that I made the right choice. Politicians continue failed policies because reversing course looks weak. Voters vote for the same party, regardless of their policies. Scottish philosopher Adam Smith wrote, the opinion which we entertain of our own character depends entirely on our judgments concerning our past conduct. It is so disagreeable to think ill of ourselves that we often purposely turn away our view from those circumstances which might render that judgment unfavorable. And Warren Buffett added, what the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior conclusions remain intact. This happens even in hard science. Max Planck, a Nobel laureate in physics, observed, a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. Even Einstein fell victim at the end of his career to this early Einstein was brilliant at destroying his own previous ideas. But the older Einstein never accepted the full implications of quantum mechanics, partly because it was inconsistent, consistent with conclusions he'd reached at his peak. If it happened to Einstein, it's happening to you. Charles Darwin recognized this tendency in himself, and he built a systematic defense that Munger decided to copy. Darwin trained himself early to intensively consider any evidence that disconfirmed his hypothesis, especially when he thought his hypothesis was particularly good. Why especially then? Because that's when inconsistency avoidance tendency is strongest. When you're most convinced that you're right, you're most resistant to contradicting evidence. The opposite is confirmation bias, seeking only evidence that supports what you already believe. So how do we protect ourselves? First, fight up front. The first time you do something matters enormously. Prevention is easiest before the chains start forming. Avoid the cigarette. Go to the gym. Do the things that you need to do. Second, adopt Darwin's practice. When you're most convinced you're right, seek disconfirming evidence. Warren Buffett adds, when you find information that contradicts your existing beliefs, you've got a special obligation to look at it and quickly. Third, stop the sunk cost trap. Warren Buffett adds here, the most important thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop. Stop digging. Ask yourself, if I were making this decision fresh today, with no history, what would I do? If the answer is different, act on it. Fourth, seek outside perspective. Let someone who wasn't committed to the earlier decision review it and finally, use it positively. If you want to change, make a public commitment. Let your inconsistency avoidance tendency work for you instead of against you. The rare life that is wisely lived, Munger says, has in it many good habits maintained and many bad habits of avoided or cured. The keyword avoided because once those chains form, you'll wear them for life. Number six, curiosity tendency. Think of this as the antidote to the biases we've been talking about. Humans are the most curious species, and when you combine human curiosity with education, you get the ability to counteract most of these psychological forces. Curiosity is the tendency that makes you question your own thinking. Incentive cost bias. Curiosity prompts you to ask, what's really motivating this person? Liking, loving tendency. Curiosity prompts you to say, what am I not seeing because I like this person? Or the opposite, what am I ignoring because I hate this person? Number three, Doubt. Avoidance. Curiosity makes us ask, what don't I know yet? Number four, inconsistency, avoidance Curiosity challenges us by asking us, what if my previous conclusion was wrong. Munger had a beautiful observation here. He said the curious are also provided with much fun and wisdom long after formal education has ended. And Munger himself was a lifelong learner. Indeed, that is the pattern I see both across the greats of the past and the present. They're all lifelong learners. Most people stop being curious when their formal education ends. They stop asking why, they stop investigating, and they stop learning. The curious like you keep going, we keep getting wiser and we keep having fun. Number 7 Kantian Fairness Tendency Most humans have a deep seated sense of fairness based on the Golden Rule. Treat others as you'd like to be treated. Kant's idea is that humans follow behavior patterns that if everyone followed them, would make the system work best for everyone. Munger observed that humans don't just follow this principle, we expect it from others. And when that expectation is violated, we react with intense hostility. We see this everywhere. Drivers naturally take turns at a one way bridge with no signs. People let others merge on the freeway. Strangers line up for things. First come, first served. No one enforces these behaviors. They just happen. And yet a lot of trouble happens when we expect fairness and it's not provided. What happens when somebody cuts in line? Rage. That's injustice. When someone takes more than their fair share, we have an intense negative reaction. The violation triggers hostility because it breaks a deep seated human norm, Munger said. How can you fail if you treat other people the way you'd like? If you did it to yourself, it's the Golden Rule. Of course it works. Understanding this helps you in two ways. First, you can harness it. Go positive and go first. People will reciprocate. We'll talk about reciprocation in a minute. It's one of the most powerful forces in the world. Second, manage the hostility. When someone responds with disproportionate anger about something small, often it's because their sense of fairness was violated. Sometimes it's about the current situation and sometimes they're making up for a past injustice. The specific incident might be minor, but the response feels major. And when you're the one feeling that anger, recognize that your reaction is partly driven by this tendency. Sometimes it's justified and sometimes it's disproportionate. Knowing the difference requires seeing the tendency operating inside yourself.
![Charlie Munger and The Psychology of Human Misjudgement [Outliers] - The Knowledge Project cover](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmegaphone.imgix.net%2Fpodcasts%2Fffb628d4-c418-11f0-acd7-b3217b3943c4%2Fimage%2F37067138e685dc4ea5d98531397f6711.png%3Fixlib%3Drails-4.3.1%26max-w%3D3000%26max-h%3D3000%26fit%3Dcrop%26auto%3Dformat%2Ccompress&w=1920&q=75)