Table of Contents
Blog
In Temerant, a fantasy world created by Patrick Rothfuss in his Kingkiller Chronicles, there are six distinct ‘magic’ systems. Three of these magic systems are described as “hard magic” – these are highly logical and science based. The other three systems are “soft magic”. The soft magic systems are tied to the ancient realm, and they rely on perception, willpower and intuition. One of these soft magic systems described by Rothfuss is called ‘Naming’. Naming is when one perceives the true name of a person, place or thing and through that understanding gains complete control over the subject.
My version of the book, and what it looks like, in case this is enough to get you intrigued
“It’s a high magic,” Chronicler said. “The highest. If you know the true name of a thing, you have power over it. If you know the name of the wind, you can command the wind. If you know the name of stone, you can command stone.”
It’s an interesting take on magic, because ‘naming’ something we can all do, every day of our lives. It’s an idea that holds true in real life. But can is the operative word there. We don’t always use it, even though we have the power to. When we do though, it can feel a bit like magic.
In the 1970’s Chris Argyris was researching how people make decisions. Through his research, he kept noticing that people would jump from personal interpretations of situations to ‘absolute truth’ in a few seconds. Situations like:
You’re presenting to your team on your campaign plan, and a player in the front row yawns – she’s bored and I’m doing a terrible presentation
A player turns up late three trainings in a row – he’s lazy and unreliable
A slightly niggly player in your team lashes out at a team mate – there goes ‘player x’ being a diva again
To map out this invisible, but incredibly quick mental process, Argyris used a ladder to help paint the picture of what is happening inside our minds. The ladder analogy worked as a way to show how we layer assumptions on assumptions as we get to our ‘absolute truth’. He ended up calling this concept the ladder of inference.
The Ladder of Inference example
Observable facts and data: Coach has called another meeting
Selected data: That’s the third meeting this week, which seems to be a lot
Interpretation (adding meaning): Why all the meetings? Plus, all meetings end up being coach and captain lecturing us about game plans that we already understand.
Assumptions: We’re going pretty good already, does she not think we’re actually doing well? Maybe she doesn’t trust us.
Conclusions: She mustn’t think we’re actually going that well, despite our results
Beliefs: Meetings are a waste of time
Action: I’m not going to participate or show any form of engagement in meetings.
In any team, there are assumptions at play that can hinder performance. I’ve been around a few teams recently, and there assumptions being communicated, albeit indirectly, pretty consistently. Assumptions like:
Meetings are a waste of time (see above for an example of how this might play out)
Coach doesn’t trust us enough
We don’t need to talk about culture
It’s not my job to have that conversation
If someone in a team thinks meetings are a waste of time, they’re going to adjust their behaviour to align to that belief. They’re going to come half-prepared. They might moan to team mates, ‘seriously, we have another meeting in for tomorrow’.
Meetings…..
If someone thinks ‘it’s not my job to have that conversation’, they’re going to see behaviour in others they don’t agree with, but not say anything. Again, they might moan to team mates “did you see Dave again today? What’s with that guy at the moment. You reckon someone is actually going to say something to him this time?’
This where the magic of naming comes in. Understanding the ladder of inference can gives us both a framework and a language to help us name what is going on in our heads whenever we’re in a situation that could be challenging, or misinterpreted.
Names,” Dal said firmly, and drew his hand back out of the fire. It was smudged with white ash, but perfectly unharmed. “Names reflect true understanding of a thing, and when you truly understand a thing you have power over it.
But the power here isn’t over the wind, or over the player who’s switched off in meetings. It’s over our own assumptions. Much like knowing the name of the wind, if we can name our assumptions we’re more likely to acknowledge them and be able to move past them.
The catch is that naming isn’t easy to learn, and Rothfuss knew it (for those fantasy haters, this is the last link back to the books, promise ;-). The main character, Kvothe spends a good chunk of the book trying to learn it, and his teacher, Elodin, refuses to just tell him how. When Kvothe finally does call the name of the wind, it comes from instinct in the moment, not because he’s mastered it, and he can’t just do it again on demand. Naming our assumptions works the same way. It’s a skill, and the first few attempts will probably feel clunky.
If you were the coach of the player above, with the story about meetings being a waste of time, understanding the ladder of inference gives you way to broach this situation. It helps you name it. Something like ‘hey, I’ve noticed you’ve been pretty unengaged in meetings lately. I’m jumping up the ladder a bit, but I’m starting to tell myself the story you’re not interested in the tactics we’re trying to implement’. A starting point like that to the conversation gives the player a chance to respond. Maybe they do think meetings are a waste of time. Maybe it’s something else entirely. Either way, it’s out in the open now.
Whether you like the ladder of inference as an analogy or not, bringing to the surface the assumptions you’re making, or the assumptions you think others are making is the behaviour to hone. Importantly, that doesn’t mean everyone agrees and moves forward. But it means an open conversation can take place, with a shared understanding of context. That’s what the ladder of inference is ultimately about. We can’t move forward with anything, a change in behaviour, a relationship, a new game plan, without a shared understanding of context. And when everyone is on the same page, operating from the same place of understanding, that is from the magic of naming something.
Quote of the Week
Keeping the literary theme going this week:
“Assumptions are dangerous things to make, and like all dangerous things to make — bombs, for instance, or strawberry shortcake — if you make even the tiniest mistake you can find yourself in terrible trouble.”
Lemony Snickett in “The Austere Academy”
An Even Deeper Dive
If you want a more in depth look at the ladder of inference, this is a good read:
If this has prompted any thoughts, email us at [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you!
Want to share the Deep Dive with friends? Just send them the link below to subscribe
