Modeling allows us to present abstract ideas in visual representations. This makes the ideas easier to understand and allows for manipulation or change.
Leaders and decision makers in all walks of life use physical modeling as a tool to make better decisions or to represent situations in ways that are more easily understood. Implementing physical models, we can manipulate and experiment with the model in order to have better control or understanding, thereby changing variables and exploring different outcomes. Modeling provides people with the ability to create real experiences that can aid in the development and understanding of a project or an idea. The possibilities are endless.
Military and political leaders use ‘war games’ to simulate the results of hypothetical situations of conflict. Students of history and children use models to re-enact historical scenarios on either very small scale (playing with toy soldiers) or full-scale battle re-enactments. Business leaders use financial models to predict the profitability of a project or product. Designers and architects create scale models to test out and examine design ideas. Weather forecasters use models to predict the impact of different weather situations.
Models can be very simple e.g. a profit/loss statement. War games or meteorological forecasts can include an indeterminate number of variables and unknowns. In either case,, these are just ‘predictions’ that are based on the inputs we assign them.
If we think about leadership and decision making in relation to time and history, there is a very interesting and important cognitive model called the ‘telescoping effect’ or ‘telescoping bias.’ This describes the change in time perception that occurs when people perceive recent events as being more remote and distant events as being more recent. The generally agreed boundary for this phenomenon is approximately 3 years. This is represented by the diagram below:
Leaders and decision makers in all walks of life use physical modeling as a tool to make better decisions or to represent situations in ways that are more easily understood. Implementing physical models, we can manipulate and experiment with the model in order to have better control or understanding, thereby changing variables and exploring different outcomes. Modeling provides people with the ability to create real experiences that can aid in the development and understanding of a project or an idea. The possibilities are endless.
Military and political leaders use ‘war games’ to simulate the results of hypothetical situations of conflict. Students of history and children use models to re-enact historical scenarios on either very small scale (playing with toy soldiers) or full-scale battle re-enactments. Business leaders use financial models to predict the profitability of a project or product. Designers and architects create scale models to test out and examine design ideas. Weather forecasters use models to predict the impact of different weather situations.
Models can be very simple e.g. a profit/loss statement. War games or meteorological forecasts can include an indeterminate number of variables and unknowns. In either case,, these are just ‘predictions’ that are based on the inputs we assign them.
If we think about leadership and decision making in relation to time and history, there is a very interesting and important cognitive model called the ‘telescoping effect’ or ‘telescoping bias.’ This describes the change in time perception that occurs when people perceive recent events as being more remote and distant events as being more recent. The generally agreed boundary for this phenomenon is approximately 3 years. This is represented by the diagram below:
While the telescoping phenomenon is used frequently in substance abuse and marketing models, it has important implications for leadership and decision making. Because of the telescoping effect, a recent event may be perceived as being well in the past or a past event as quite recent (say, a military attack, a presidential coup, an election loss.) Regardless of the actual event, the telescoping bias that appears will affect how much or how little we weigh the importance of that event.
During the early days of the Vietnam War, there was so much political turmoil and uncertainty in South Vietnam that events and timing of these events became extremely confused and distorted. Events that had occurred years prior (particularly in the political sphere) were perceived as more recent or the timing could not be accurately perceived. When considering the Tet Offensive, the exact dating of this event became a subject of debate. Often it was recalled as more recent than it actually was. This was all very important because it affected policy and military level decisions in the US Government as well as domestic political sentiment.
Although telescoping occurs in forward and backward directions, the telescoping effect occurs more often to increase the reporting of events that occurred more recently. We tend to recall as more recent those events that may have occurred further in the past. (This is particularly true in self-reporting of the onset of substance abuse.) Telescoping also leads to an over reporting of the frequency of events. We will emphasize and recall events to a greater degree than they actually occurred. What this means when making decisions is that our recall and thinking can become distorted. We can place too much emphasis on events that occurred in the past that might not deserve as much attention as we may perceive. During the Cold War, Soviet activities in the Third World took on a greater perceived threat that required a reaction because they were viewed as imminent dangers, even if they had occurred years earlier. Even today, and while this may not be strict telescoping, the memories of Vietnam are so strong that even though the war occurred over 30 years ago, memories of it are still vivid and relevant.
When we create models for leadership and decision making in a traditional sense, much is dependent on the perspective from which we are looking at the subject: bottom up, or top down; indigenous observer or outsider? What are the variables and are we looking at adverse or benign conditions? From what angles are we approaching: on the ground or high above? A military commander at headquarters will view a political situation much differently than an officer in the field as would a policymaker in Washington. A Foreign Service officer on the ground in a country will have a very different understanding and perspective than a political appointee in Washington. These differences in perspective and experience will impact the way a situation is viewed and the direction of the decisions we make.
Conveying this concept in the classroom and making students aware of the potential for distortion in perception is extremely important. They can begin to recognize the possibilities for misperception in their recollections. While this may not change their recollections, at least the awareness of the phenomenon can help in decision making and avoiding potential distortions in thinking (by creating ‘landmark’ events that provide better reference.) When I consider courses that I might teach involving crises and significant historical events, they would involve ample opportunities to present facts/events in a way where the possibilities for telescoping and errors in accurate time recollection could occur; e.g. the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the 1948 Berlin Airlift, the US Constitutional debates/process or the Civil War secession/outbreak of war. For this to be effective and the telescoping modeling to be carried out, students would need to have a sense of the actual historical facts and dates. Unfortunately, this sense of time and history is sometimes lost in today’s ’15 minute news cycle’ and the focus on ‘immediate’ responses and reactions.
References:
Draaisma, Douwe; Pomerans, Erica (2004). Why life speeds up as you get older: on autobiographical memory. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 201–225. ISBN 0-521-83424-4.
Gaskell, G., Wright, D., O’Muircheartaigh, C.TELESCOPING OF LANDMARK EVENTS, IMPLICATIONS FOR SURVEY RESEARCH
Janssen, Steve M. J.; Chessa, Antonio G.; Murre, Jaap M. J. (2006). "Memory for time: How people date events". Memory & Cognition 34: 138–147.
National Research Council (1984). Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology: Building A Bridge Between Disciplines. Washington, DC. pp. 119–125. ISBN 0-309-07784-2.
During the early days of the Vietnam War, there was so much political turmoil and uncertainty in South Vietnam that events and timing of these events became extremely confused and distorted. Events that had occurred years prior (particularly in the political sphere) were perceived as more recent or the timing could not be accurately perceived. When considering the Tet Offensive, the exact dating of this event became a subject of debate. Often it was recalled as more recent than it actually was. This was all very important because it affected policy and military level decisions in the US Government as well as domestic political sentiment.
Although telescoping occurs in forward and backward directions, the telescoping effect occurs more often to increase the reporting of events that occurred more recently. We tend to recall as more recent those events that may have occurred further in the past. (This is particularly true in self-reporting of the onset of substance abuse.) Telescoping also leads to an over reporting of the frequency of events. We will emphasize and recall events to a greater degree than they actually occurred. What this means when making decisions is that our recall and thinking can become distorted. We can place too much emphasis on events that occurred in the past that might not deserve as much attention as we may perceive. During the Cold War, Soviet activities in the Third World took on a greater perceived threat that required a reaction because they were viewed as imminent dangers, even if they had occurred years earlier. Even today, and while this may not be strict telescoping, the memories of Vietnam are so strong that even though the war occurred over 30 years ago, memories of it are still vivid and relevant.
When we create models for leadership and decision making in a traditional sense, much is dependent on the perspective from which we are looking at the subject: bottom up, or top down; indigenous observer or outsider? What are the variables and are we looking at adverse or benign conditions? From what angles are we approaching: on the ground or high above? A military commander at headquarters will view a political situation much differently than an officer in the field as would a policymaker in Washington. A Foreign Service officer on the ground in a country will have a very different understanding and perspective than a political appointee in Washington. These differences in perspective and experience will impact the way a situation is viewed and the direction of the decisions we make.
Conveying this concept in the classroom and making students aware of the potential for distortion in perception is extremely important. They can begin to recognize the possibilities for misperception in their recollections. While this may not change their recollections, at least the awareness of the phenomenon can help in decision making and avoiding potential distortions in thinking (by creating ‘landmark’ events that provide better reference.) When I consider courses that I might teach involving crises and significant historical events, they would involve ample opportunities to present facts/events in a way where the possibilities for telescoping and errors in accurate time recollection could occur; e.g. the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the 1948 Berlin Airlift, the US Constitutional debates/process or the Civil War secession/outbreak of war. For this to be effective and the telescoping modeling to be carried out, students would need to have a sense of the actual historical facts and dates. Unfortunately, this sense of time and history is sometimes lost in today’s ’15 minute news cycle’ and the focus on ‘immediate’ responses and reactions.
References:
Draaisma, Douwe; Pomerans, Erica (2004). Why life speeds up as you get older: on autobiographical memory. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 201–225. ISBN 0-521-83424-4.
Gaskell, G., Wright, D., O’Muircheartaigh, C.TELESCOPING OF LANDMARK EVENTS, IMPLICATIONS FOR SURVEY RESEARCH
Janssen, Steve M. J.; Chessa, Antonio G.; Murre, Jaap M. J. (2006). "Memory for time: How people date events". Memory & Cognition 34: 138–147.
National Research Council (1984). Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology: Building A Bridge Between Disciplines. Washington, DC. pp. 119–125. ISBN 0-309-07784-2.