We like coincidences. They, in an odd way, make us feel special, unique. The problem arises when we make decisions based on coincidences that we have not identified, as coincidences.
As human beings we strive to make meaning in our lives. It’s actually part of our survival.
Trouble is we often find ourselves making decisions so that we compound this meaning, this narrative.
A few weeks ago I was introduced to a AI specialist and particle physicist at CERN, Richard Polifka. In the same week, I had a conversation with ICSA about delivering a webinar on ‘future governance and data’. A coincidence. Of course, coincidences aren’t a good way to make decisions, but we as humans are hard wired to be attracted to them.
I made the decision to contact Richard, and we are now doing a webinar together for ICSA. This is okay, of course, because the coincidence has simply led to a collaboration. The problem lies when we make strategic decisions based on coincidence. A coincidence in our data or an outcome. That is a recipe for disaster.
Are we making decisions because we are seeking to see a pattern, where it gives us a sense of control, meaning and alignment with our own thoughts, where none exists,
Or, are we doing the ‘hard work’ of making decisions based on the evidence before us?
If we are doing the former, we will inevitably find ourselves on the wrong path.