I love this “SOUL-mate decision-making framework” shared by Aman Bhutani, CEO of GoDaddy. How do you know if a current, or new, role fits well?
Something you want to do. Opportunity to help people more than yourself. YoU should bring something special and unique to the role. Learning is key, there has to be something you’re learning in the role.
#1 question I get in mentoring sessions is – I have this offer, should I take it? Or how do I decide what to do next? Over the years, I built an acronym to make it simple – make sure the new role meets the SOUL-mate test – These are the requirements:
The S is for Something you are hungry for (not just interested or passionate about – truly hungry for). This will make sure you wake up every morning ready to succeed in the new role.
The O reminds you that there should be opportunity for everyone and not just you. Successful people do a lot of things right, and luck plays its part, but they also ride waves.
The U means that YOU must bring something special to the table. There must be a reason you are a match – you should have a competitive advantage over others.
Finally, L is for learning. If you are not going to learn anything, don’t take it. Remember that this often comes from the people just as much as the role itself.
One of the things I have learned about effective decision making is that the best decisions are often made by diverse groups of people. Saying or hearing these words is magic: That’s really interesting. I had never thought of it that way before. Thank you.
A gem from Mary Meeker I found when reading the 2017 Internet Trends report published by Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers (KPCB). Via John.
Decision journals are designed to create a log of the decisions you’ve made and why you made them. To both capture a snapshot of your thinking at the start, then use the notes to improve your decision making process when you review it later.
I first heard about decision journaling when Ian Stewart pointed to a Farnham Street post a few years back. Then it came up again in late 2017 via Matt on the OFF RCRD podcast. I decided to take another look.
Screenshot of the Farnham Street post about decision journals, highlighting the need for quality control of our decisions.
“You can think of a decision journal as quality control” for your decisions — yes, that fits my mindset. A quality check in six months or a year to prevent hindsight bias.
I haven’t made this a standard practice yet, probably because it feels like too much overhead. These days when reviewing success and failure I find myself reflecting back without a full picture of where my mind was at the start. What have a I learned in between? Will I repeat the same mistakes? How can I repeat the top bets that paid off?
For example, for a given decision, what do I expect to change? What am I betting on, and how will I know if I’m right or wrong?
In 2018 I hope to be better at stating my intentions ahead — taking the time to create the snapshot of my thinking at the start. Blogging this publicly to keep myself accountable for journaling the decisions at the start.
Bonus: Two recent mental models for framing your decisions as “bets” that I’ve come across, in case you find them helpful.
Ray Dalio’s expected value calculation in Principles (see my book review):
Make your decisions as expected value calculations. Think of every decision as a bet with a probability and a reward for being right and a probability and a penalty for being wrong. Suppose something that has only a one-in-five chance (20%) of succeeding will return ten times (e.g., $1,000) the amount that it will cost you if it fails ($100). Its expected value is positive ($120), so it’s probably a smart decision, even though the odds are against you, as long as you can also cover the loss.
The Sensible Leader 