I share with you a bit about what I have learned. I've struggled a lot. Everything is like broken. I'm still struggling right now. However, I'm still working on something to make our situation better. I do several research and experiments on Happiness, psychology, neuroscience and here are something I'm want to share.
+ Hedonic adaption: Hedonic adaption is special psychological effects that explains about how we perceive about happiness. Even after a big happy moment, our level of happiness do down quickly. We adapt our perception to our current situations. So it's like nothing will last forever. Hedonic adaption is both good and bad. It makes us adapt quickly with any situations. It keeps us safe. So we should appreciate it and learn how to make use of this effect rather than blaming it. Learns to attend with everything you do even it's bad, explore something news. It will help you deal with bad effects of hedonic adaptation.
+ Mindfulness: Do some mindfulness exercise. We feel stress because our mind think we're having problems. Our mind made up our feelings to keep us safe [7]. It's good for us. Mindfulness help us understand more about feeling and more enjoy the moment.
+ Mind body connection: Your health affects your mental, and your mental will affect your health. To me, it's not because some spiritual belief, but it's how systems work [3] [4]. Our body, our mind are systems. They are part of bigger system. They connect each others and interact with each other, sending some feedback. So try to improve both your health and your mental. Try to improve your health diet, do exercises and taking care of our thoughts and feelings.
+ We aren't rational. Our thinking system is optimal but it has limitations [3]. It has a lot of problems (cognitive biases). Learn to appreciate and find a way to make it better. For example, we can adapt. We update our belief overtime. Try to make new better habits[5]. Make small steps.
+ There isn't perfect things. Every systems aren't perfect. Our immune system, our cognitive system, organizations, data structures, design patterns,... Appreciate what works, what not and improve it.
Some interesting books, articles you might interest:
If you haven't already, have a look at Thinking, Fast and Slow. The basic problem (AFAICT) is that, in practice, people judge risk based on how easy it is to recall an example, rather than statistical likelihood. With the media constantly harping on about a "mass shooting epidemic", this leads people to massively overestimate the risk of being a victim of a mass shooting, and because it's (what Kahneman calls) a "System 1" process (basically his term for "intuitive"), and because "System 2" processes (basically his term for "analytical") are very strongly predisposed toward concurrence with System 1 conclusions, it is almost impossible for data and reason to displace the intuitive presumption that mass shootings are a significant threat.
by AthertonWing 2021-12-10
Never let another player dictate your play to you. If they're pinging for something, take a moment and think for yourself about whether or not it's a good play - Don't automatically go for it because they're pinging, but also don't automatically dismiss it because they're being annoying about it. Deep breath, make a call.
After the game, take time to re-watch that moment in the replay, and try to see it from their perspective - what are they losing for you not being there, and what are you gaining for being where you decided to go? Did you make the right call? If you think so after looking at it for a few minutes, don't worry about it. Tons of people make emotional pings because they don't know what to do and they feel trapped and pressured. But, you can't change the likelihood of the play to succeed just because one of your teammates wants it to work.
Making the right play - the one that you know you can make, the one that feels right - is going to net you a better result over time, because the frequency of people actually afking when you don't camp for them is actually quite low - negativity bias will have you having an easier time remembering the ones that do because it's such a stand-out moment, and availability heuristic will have you overestimating the frequency of them because you can remember them happening more recently, but if you actually collect some data about how often it happens, over a large sample size, like say a month or two, you'll see that it's not that big of a deal. (For more information on the biases mentioned, check out "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman)
In short, make your own decisions, but consider other people's opinions while making them. Don't sweat the small stuff, because focusing on your own play (which you have control over) is much more effective than focusing on external factors like teammates (which you can't). The difference between you and a pro-player isn't your teammates. Learn, grow, win, climb.
by BenDSover 2021-12-10
Well said. I would just like to take your point about how poorly informed people are a bit further to one about psychology and decision making: One of the best books I know for understanding the thinking of Republican conservatives and Trump supporters is the book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman (who won the Nobel Prize in economics for his research).
Namely, they have only developed their "fast" thinking abilities: i.e. prejudices, and emotional, 2-valued (Yes/No, Good/Evil) gut-reaction decision making. And they are terribly poor at "slow" thinking: i.e. complex, abstract, critical and lengthy calculations in a multi-valued space of uncertainty (e.g. probabilities and statistics, etc.).
And this has created a nasty game of Hawks vs Doves (i.e. Assholes vs Cooperators) that the political left needs to develop a better, broad political strategy in playing.
by bshacklett 2020-01-01
This sounds a lot like System 1 and System 2 as described by Thinking, Fast and Slow https://www.amazon.com/dp/0374533555/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i...
Veritasium did a great job summarizing the idea:
https://youtu.be/UBVV8pch1dM
I had more or less the same intellectual trip you are having. Kahneman was a good starting point of the three disciplines. You might want to check "Thinking fast and slow"
> "People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results, they choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar." - Michael Burry; The Big Short.
> Why don't any of the people around us understand bitcoin? Why do they ignore it? Why do they refuse to look below the surface?
Because critical thinking consumes energy, and is not pleasant. Whenever we learn new things we have to fire up parts of the brain that we don't use as often.
For example: Learning to drive a car is a stressful and unpleasant time because your brain is fired up learning all the new skills, at once. After a few years you can drive without even thinking.
It's called Fast Thinking and Slow Thinking, slow thinking being when you are learning new skills, material, ideas etc., and fast thinking when you can do things automatically.
In short: People, all of us, don't like to think slow.
Long answer:
There's a book on the subject Thinking, Fast and Slow by Deniel Kahneman
> Major New York Times bestseller
> Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award in 2012
> Selected by the New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011
> A Globe and Mail Best Books of the Year 2011 Title
> One of The Economist's 2011 Books of the Year
> One of The Wall Street Journal's Best Nonfiction Books of the Year 2011
> 2013 Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient
> Kahneman's work with Amos Tversky is the subject of Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds
> In the international bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, the renowned psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think. System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation―each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.
> Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives―and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble. Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award and the Los Angeles Times Book Prize and selected by The New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow is destined to be a classic.
by Dypa4ek 2019-11-17
Not a course, though I heard this is a good one https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555 (the book is about cognitive biases). The author is an economist and psychologist at the same time, even got Nobel Prize in economics.
Don't really know if this is type of thing you are looking for.
by ludwigvonmises 2019-07-21
If you want to learn about the other 99 cognitive biases people are unwittingly carrying around (perhaps you, too), check out Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.
by Timwi 2019-07-21
I'm by no means a neuroscientist, but Veritasium made an interesting video based on the popular science book Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman.
by timrosenblatt 2019-07-21
Check out a book called “Thinking fast and slow” by Daniel Kahneman. It goes into this type of stuff, and how we have two types of systems in our brain that do what you’re describing.
Is this just not classic recency bias? Many TV shows feature a gay couple/character, and gay marriage was in the national news for years. People are shown examples through media constantly, and therefore think it's more prevalent than it really is.
This applies to almost all issues too, plane accidents being one of the more obvious ones (plane travel is many times safer than car travel, and yet many people don't see it that way).
Thinking Fast and Slow is a great book that covers at length recency bias and its affects [1]. Quite eye opening to me was one study where people were asked to spin a wheel with 1-100, and then asked how many African nations are in the UN. The number on the wheel had a profound affect on the number people picked [2], despite the fact that the number on the wheel should clearly has no meaning.
>no one tried to tell my that my thinking is wrong
It's a difficult task, because the way our brains work makes personal experience supersede external information that contradict it, even when scientifically, objectively, our experience is... not "wrong" per se, but so incomplete that it veers into "wrong" teritory. I teach people how to get along with people, which is mainly applied psichology and neurology (specifically social neurology), so I come against this feature (it's not a bug, it's a feature) every time. For reference: Daniel Kahnemann's work . For reference: Chris Niebauer's book .
Your brain dupes you (it meakes you wrong, giving you the impression you're right) in several key areas relevant to our discussion here:
What You See Is All There Is: our brains operate on the assupmtion they have all the info needed to make good decisions and reach true conclusions, neglecting that there are swathes of information that might be / are relevant and that finally change the outlook completely.
Our Left-Brain Intepreter has the task to keep the story in our heads logically consistent, not correct. As such, it will gladly add to reality, or substract from it, only to keep the story. Please see this and this.
To accomplish this task, the LBI resorts to cognitive biases like overgeneralization, personalization, confirmation bias etc.
Its work is so powerful and so well hidden from conscience that most people, when confronted with science, will readily deny science ("well, that might be true but not for me") than accepting our thinking might be flawed.
In your case, in order to examine what biases are in play and what is their result, I'd start questioning the hidden meaning of your use of notions like "chad", "betabux" and such. It speaks to overgeneralization (with a heavy serving of dehumanization) and confirmation bias.
Humans are unique. There are, of course, trends (sociology doesn't exist for nothing) but so far no human being looks and act exactly like another human being always and in all aspects; more, humans change over time: experience, opinions, world views and behavior shift as time passes. That would be the first step I'd take if I were you: stop working with archetypes and start looking for tiny differences. The world will get extremely rich if you do that.
TL;DR: you're wrong, but your brains won't let you see that and you have to voluntarily challenge it to improve your life quality.
Edited to add: and I didn't even touch the issue of cultural and social norms and conditioning, learned helplesness and many other phenomena that interfere and change all the stuff above.
by nyct0phile 2019-01-13
Humans are not intuitively good at probability and statistics, because of numerous cognitive biases. -Thinking: Fast & Slow
by buckeyevol28 2018-11-10
Also reading through your posts I see you think Columbus traffic is unusually bad, even though we have some of the lowest congestion and commute times of any major metro.
I also see that you think we've reach essentially unprecedented levels of violence, when though it's much lower here and most everywhere else as there is been a steady decline for decades.
Both of the above (definitely) and the development discussion (possibly) are examples of the availability heuristic, a natural tendency to use mental shortcuts to draw conclusions based in the most readily accessible and available information.
Media and crime is the prime example. For example, crime deceased by 40% in 90's but media coverage quadrupled so people thought crime was increasing.
So it seems with traffic, crime, and development, you're drawing incorrect conclusions from things that are immediately available (stuck in traffic, crime in the news, the HQ2 proposal).
This post looks a bit condescending after writing it out, but I don't mean it that way. And I would recommend the book to everybody since it's useful and we're all prone to these things.
by Klownd 2018-11-10
Hi Keatz01, it sounds like you already have a pretty cool background, so I'll limit these recommendations to what might be useful for you now.
Harvard Business Review: I'm sure you know it, but some of these articles can be really insightful. Look for articles that are contextualized against data and/or case studies.
The McKinsey Quarterly: Tends to be more 'hit' than 'miss', but their introduction of the 'Five Fifty' section (where you take five minutes to decide whether investing close on an hour would be useful) has been nice.
Hopefully something in there proves useful. Beyond that, it's more a case of staying up-to-date. Stay abreast of emergent technology so that you know whether it's useful, take time to reassess current solutions now and then, etc etc. The next one on my reading list is /u/eliteregos' recommendation for The Trusted Advisor .
All the best!
by LeeroyEleven 2018-11-10
Also check out a book called Thinking Fast and Slow
+ Hedonic adaption: Hedonic adaption is special psychological effects that explains about how we perceive about happiness. Even after a big happy moment, our level of happiness do down quickly. We adapt our perception to our current situations. So it's like nothing will last forever. Hedonic adaption is both good and bad. It makes us adapt quickly with any situations. It keeps us safe. So we should appreciate it and learn how to make use of this effect rather than blaming it. Learns to attend with everything you do even it's bad, explore something news. It will help you deal with bad effects of hedonic adaptation.
+ Mindfulness: Do some mindfulness exercise. We feel stress because our mind think we're having problems. Our mind made up our feelings to keep us safe [7]. It's good for us. Mindfulness help us understand more about feeling and more enjoy the moment.
+ Mind body connection: Your health affects your mental, and your mental will affect your health. To me, it's not because some spiritual belief, but it's how systems work [3] [4]. Our body, our mind are systems. They are part of bigger system. They connect each others and interact with each other, sending some feedback. So try to improve both your health and your mental. Try to improve your health diet, do exercises and taking care of our thoughts and feelings.
+ We aren't rational. Our thinking system is optimal but it has limitations [3]. It has a lot of problems (cognitive biases). Learn to appreciate and find a way to make it better. For example, we can adapt. We update our belief overtime. Try to make new better habits[5]. Make small steps.
+ There isn't perfect things. Every systems aren't perfect. Our immune system, our cognitive system, organizations, data structures, design patterns,... Appreciate what works, what not and improve it.
Some interesting books, articles you might interest:
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[3] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Systems-Donella-H-Meadows/dp...
[4] https://www.amazon.com/Mindbody-Prescription-Healing-Body-Pa...
[5] https://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-Insecurity-Message-Age-Anxiety...
If you haven't already, have a look at Thinking, Fast and Slow. The basic problem (AFAICT) is that, in practice, people judge risk based on how easy it is to recall an example, rather than statistical likelihood. With the media constantly harping on about a "mass shooting epidemic", this leads people to massively overestimate the risk of being a victim of a mass shooting, and because it's (what Kahneman calls) a "System 1" process (basically his term for "intuitive"), and because "System 2" processes (basically his term for "analytical") are very strongly predisposed toward concurrence with System 1 conclusions, it is almost impossible for data and reason to displace the intuitive presumption that mass shootings are a significant threat.
Never let another player dictate your play to you. If they're pinging for something, take a moment and think for yourself about whether or not it's a good play - Don't automatically go for it because they're pinging, but also don't automatically dismiss it because they're being annoying about it. Deep breath, make a call.
After the game, take time to re-watch that moment in the replay, and try to see it from their perspective - what are they losing for you not being there, and what are you gaining for being where you decided to go? Did you make the right call? If you think so after looking at it for a few minutes, don't worry about it. Tons of people make emotional pings because they don't know what to do and they feel trapped and pressured. But, you can't change the likelihood of the play to succeed just because one of your teammates wants it to work.
Making the right play - the one that you know you can make, the one that feels right - is going to net you a better result over time, because the frequency of people actually afking when you don't camp for them is actually quite low - negativity bias will have you having an easier time remembering the ones that do because it's such a stand-out moment, and availability heuristic will have you overestimating the frequency of them because you can remember them happening more recently, but if you actually collect some data about how often it happens, over a large sample size, like say a month or two, you'll see that it's not that big of a deal. (For more information on the biases mentioned, check out "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman)
In short, make your own decisions, but consider other people's opinions while making them. Don't sweat the small stuff, because focusing on your own play (which you have control over) is much more effective than focusing on external factors like teammates (which you can't). The difference between you and a pro-player isn't your teammates. Learn, grow, win, climb.
Well said. I would just like to take your point about how poorly informed people are a bit further to one about psychology and decision making: One of the best books I know for understanding the thinking of Republican conservatives and Trump supporters is the book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman (who won the Nobel Prize in economics for his research).
Namely, they have only developed their "fast" thinking abilities: i.e. prejudices, and emotional, 2-valued (Yes/No, Good/Evil) gut-reaction decision making. And they are terribly poor at "slow" thinking: i.e. complex, abstract, critical and lengthy calculations in a multi-valued space of uncertainty (e.g. probabilities and statistics, etc.).
And this has created a nasty game of Hawks vs Doves (i.e. Assholes vs Cooperators) that the political left needs to develop a better, broad political strategy in playing.
Veritasium did a great job summarizing the idea: https://youtu.be/UBVV8pch1dM
I had more or less the same intellectual trip you are having. Kahneman was a good starting point of the three disciplines. You might want to check "Thinking fast and slow"
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
Enjoy the trip mate!
https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
I must note this is a terrible way of gathering information. You have gotten one person claiming their cable works well...
Recommended reading: https://smile.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555
Short answer:
> "People want an authority to tell them how to value things, but they choose this authority not based on facts or results, they choose it because it seems authoritative and familiar." - Michael Burry; The Big Short.
> Why don't any of the people around us understand bitcoin? Why do they ignore it? Why do they refuse to look below the surface?
Because critical thinking consumes energy, and is not pleasant. Whenever we learn new things we have to fire up parts of the brain that we don't use as often.
For example: Learning to drive a car is a stressful and unpleasant time because your brain is fired up learning all the new skills, at once. After a few years you can drive without even thinking.
It's called Fast Thinking and Slow Thinking, slow thinking being when you are learning new skills, material, ideas etc., and fast thinking when you can do things automatically.
In short: People, all of us, don't like to think slow.
Long answer:
There's a book on the subject Thinking, Fast and Slow by Deniel Kahneman
> Major New York Times bestseller > Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award in 2012 > Selected by the New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011 > A Globe and Mail Best Books of the Year 2011 Title > One of The Economist's 2011 Books of the Year > One of The Wall Street Journal's Best Nonfiction Books of the Year 2011 > 2013 Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient > Kahneman's work with Amos Tversky is the subject of Michael Lewis's The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds
> In the international bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, the renowned psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think. System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation―each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.
> Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives―and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble. Winner of the National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award and the Los Angeles Times Book Prize and selected by The New York Times Book Review as one of the ten best books of 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow is destined to be a classic.
Not a course, though I heard this is a good one https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555 (the book is about cognitive biases). The author is an economist and psychologist at the same time, even got Nobel Prize in economics.
Don't really know if this is type of thing you are looking for.
If you want to learn about the other 99 cognitive biases people are unwittingly carrying around (perhaps you, too), check out Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.
I'm by no means a neuroscientist, but Veritasium made an interesting video based on the popular science book Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman.
Check out a book called “Thinking fast and slow” by Daniel Kahneman. It goes into this type of stuff, and how we have two types of systems in our brain that do what you’re describing.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0374533555/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_adGTCb56Y9JY2
Summary: https://fourminutebooks.com/thinking-fast-and-slow-summary/
This applies to almost all issues too, plane accidents being one of the more obvious ones (plane travel is many times safer than car travel, and yet many people don't see it that way).
Thinking Fast and Slow is a great book that covers at length recency bias and its affects [1]. Quite eye opening to me was one study where people were asked to spin a wheel with 1-100, and then asked how many African nations are in the UN. The number on the wheel had a profound affect on the number people picked [2], despite the fact that the number on the wheel should clearly has no meaning.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[2] https://www.realclearscience.com/lists/10_problems_with_how_...
I'll recommend some books that I'm reading right now
Thinking, fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman
Dragons of Eden by Carl Sagan
Broca's Brain by Carl Sagan
Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman by Richard Feynman
Why Nations Fail by Robinson and Acemoglu
In Afghanistan's Shadow: Baluch Nationalism and Soviet Temptations
The Terrorist Prince: The Life and Death of Murtaza Bhutto
>no one tried to tell my that my thinking is wrong
It's a difficult task, because the way our brains work makes personal experience supersede external information that contradict it, even when scientifically, objectively, our experience is... not "wrong" per se, but so incomplete that it veers into "wrong" teritory. I teach people how to get along with people, which is mainly applied psichology and neurology (specifically social neurology), so I come against this feature (it's not a bug, it's a feature) every time. For reference: Daniel Kahnemann's work . For reference: Chris Niebauer's book .
Your brain dupes you (it meakes you wrong, giving you the impression you're right) in several key areas relevant to our discussion here:
In your case, in order to examine what biases are in play and what is their result, I'd start questioning the hidden meaning of your use of notions like "chad", "betabux" and such. It speaks to overgeneralization (with a heavy serving of dehumanization) and confirmation bias.
Humans are unique. There are, of course, trends (sociology doesn't exist for nothing) but so far no human being looks and act exactly like another human being always and in all aspects; more, humans change over time: experience, opinions, world views and behavior shift as time passes. That would be the first step I'd take if I were you: stop working with archetypes and start looking for tiny differences. The world will get extremely rich if you do that.
TL;DR: you're wrong, but your brains won't let you see that and you have to voluntarily challenge it to improve your life quality.
Edited to add: and I didn't even touch the issue of cultural and social norms and conditioning, learned helplesness and many other phenomena that interfere and change all the stuff above.
Humans are not intuitively good at probability and statistics, because of numerous cognitive biases. -Thinking: Fast & Slow
Also reading through your posts I see you think Columbus traffic is unusually bad, even though we have some of the lowest congestion and commute times of any major metro.
I also see that you think we've reach essentially unprecedented levels of violence, when though it's much lower here and most everywhere else as there is been a steady decline for decades.
Both of the above (definitely) and the development discussion (possibly) are examples of the availability heuristic, a natural tendency to use mental shortcuts to draw conclusions based in the most readily accessible and available information.
Media and crime is the prime example. For example, crime deceased by 40% in 90's but media coverage quadrupled so people thought crime was increasing.
So it seems with traffic, crime, and development, you're drawing incorrect conclusions from things that are immediately available (stuck in traffic, crime in the news, the HQ2 proposal).
Availability Heuristic
Since one of my favorite books, Thinking, Fast and Slow is about this and other cognitive heuristics and biases plus how to avoid them. And it's by one of the Nobel Economist (technically psychologists but Nobel in Economics) who first discovered these, I thought it may be useful to advertise the book and point out something you may find beneficial.
This post looks a bit condescending after writing it out, but I don't mean it that way. And I would recommend the book to everybody since it's useful and we're all prone to these things.
Hi Keatz01, it sounds like you already have a pretty cool background, so I'll limit these recommendations to what might be useful for you now.
The Lean Startup : Eric Ries (2011), is an easy read and I have found it useful to be familiar with the terminology/practical tips that it mentions. His 2017 extension has not been quite so well received.
Strategy Beyond the Hockey Stick : Bradley, Hirt and Smit (2018), is also accessible (albeit labored at times), and offers a few suggestions for new ways to think about quantifying the value of innovation (economic profit, in a nutshell). Despite being a McKinsey special, I felt like the explanation of their methodologies was lacking.
Thinking Fast and Slow : Daniel Kahneman (2013), is one of my favorite books, and discusses the way people think. It offers an excellent insight to behavioral economics and better develops on what you might find in Gladwell's Blink (2007).
Games People Play : Eric Berne (1966), is a fun read, not much more, and can give insight to typical behavioral patterns.
Harvard Business Review: I'm sure you know it, but some of these articles can be really insightful. Look for articles that are contextualized against data and/or case studies.
The McKinsey Quarterly: Tends to be more 'hit' than 'miss', but their introduction of the 'Five Fifty' section (where you take five minutes to decide whether investing close on an hour would be useful) has been nice.
Case in Point : Marc Cosentino (2018), is probably my highest recommendation for a casing primer. The skills are useful to have so that you can efficiently consider a problem.
Hopefully something in there proves useful. Beyond that, it's more a case of staying up-to-date. Stay abreast of emergent technology so that you know whether it's useful, take time to reassess current solutions now and then, etc etc. The next one on my reading list is /u/eliteregos' recommendation for The Trusted Advisor .
All the best!
Also check out a book called Thinking Fast and Slow
https://toptalkedbooks.com/amzn/0374533555