Someone I love once told me that I overthink everything. Ironically, I started overthinking about why I overthink. After a lot of thought I realized that I try to fit every problem into a model for analysis. Models help me structure my thought process, and help me question my assumptions and communicate my analysis. Most of my thought process is spent in trying to fit the prevailing problem to an existing model, whether it is the Game Theory model, Wisdom of Crowds model or Markov Processes.
“Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful” - George E.P. Box
Models do not give you nicely packaged answers. Nor are all the models always right. They help you structure your thought process and help you find a solution. I started studying more about formal models in a course I took from University of Michigan on Coursera by Scott E Page. Scott is the Director of Center for Study of Complex Systems. I read a few of his books, one of them being Complex Adaptive Systems. In this book, I found the concept of Hedgehogs vs. Foxes to be intriguing. This concept seems to coincide with the manager vs. leader arguments I find in literature that I studied in the leadership class during my short stint at National University of Singapore.. In Complex Adaptive Systems, the concept I speak about talks about how the Fox knows many things but the hedgehog only knows one major thing. I focused on analyzing my thinking process and where I fall on the scale of fox/hedgehog. It is interesting to analyze who you are, so that you can stop trying to be who you are not.
If you analyze the three circles of the Hedgehog concept, it basically talks about analyzing your passions, your skills and what can give you economic satisfaction and then choosing something, which is the intersection of the three. I wrote another blog on “Anything Worth Doing is Worth Over Doing “which talks a little more about passion and how there is a feedback loop between passion and skills.
Philip Tetlock’s book "Expert Political Judgment", talks about idiosyncrasy and how erroneous 'expert' judgments about future events can be. Hedgehogs use only one model, while foxes use many informal models, as shown in the picture below. Isaiah Berlin (social and political theorist, philosopher and historian of ideas, "thought by many to be the dominant scholar of his generation") said, that Hedgehogs have just one, powerful response to a threat: they roll themselves into a ball, and present spikes to possible predators. Foxes, by contrast, draw on many different patterns of general understanding, making mistakes along the way without ever committing to a grand strategy; they have no single response to challenges. These differences between the expert and the generalist are what Tetlock used to name the two ends of the dimension of distinctive 'thinking styles' for future oriented complex problems. His book shows that one of these cognitive styles is superior to the other in predicting events and adapting to new information.
People with Hedgehog cognitive style are what I call “single minded people”. They like simple models, which are decisive and result in binary verdicts and are easily replicable. They don’t like multiple scenario models each with a different probability. They need established, uncontroversial models, which have examples of having succeeded in the past. They need approval of their peers and resist any argument contradicting the model. They basically need a sense of closure and finality in order to feel happy.
Foxes on the other hand do not commit to any one model and prefer to calibrate their insights based on many different perspectives. They adapt quickly to unexpected events and are tolerant to the idea of being challenged on what they believe to be true. They thrive in the face of uncertainty, and continuously adjust their responses, rather than sticking to a simple preset plan. Hedgehogs flourish in an environment with minimal uncertainties, while Foxes thrive in chaos.
Now, compare this to the theory of Managers vs. Leaders in the corporate world and you will see a lot of overlap. The concept of “targets and accountability” was made by and for Managers, who embody the characteristics of Hedgehogs. Leaders on the other hand, thrive in an uncertain environment much like the fox. Situations like a new product/business or there is a crisis, which needs to be handled by thinking outside the box. Managers are good at following the process that has already been laid out by leaders or improve the process for achieving efficiencies once the business has reached a certain level of predictability or a crisis has been resolved. Managers are good at “keeping the lights on” and will succumb if put in a novel situation or crisis for which they do not have direct experience dealing with.
In Silicon Valley you find three types of people:
1. People who work for large companies
2. Entrepreneurs who begin startups
3. People who work for startups
The first type is what I call Hedgehogs, for they need the predictability and stability of large companies to go about their life securely. They cannot handle waking up in the morning with the uncertainties that come with the world of startup companies. They serve a purpose as these large companies are doing what you call incremental innovation rather than cutting edge invention or innovation. Intrapreneurs are an exception to this, but that is a topic for another blog. Entrepreneurs are Foxes who thrive on the uncertainties of the startup world. They cannot stand the routines of working in a large company, and trust me they will go crazy. People who work for startups are somewhere in middle in that they are closer to Foxes but for various reasons, including lack of opportunity or a great idea of their own, they choose to work for a startup. Most of these guys do eventually end up creating their own start-up.
While Foxes are actively looking for opportunities to address complex problems and are always ready to jump onto the next big thing, Hedgehogs will not be able to recognize an opportunity even when it is presented to them Sometimes, even when explained about the opportunity and rewards, they will analyze the risks associated with it and choose to continue on the conservative path.
Unfortunately the world has become too complex for the Hedgehog’s style and we need Fox-like outlooks to deal with today’s problems. The problem with the Fox’s style is that it does not come with a neat, closed model, defined goals, and easy metrics like the Hedgehog does. It requires gradual iterations to move forward. The fox’s approach responds to new information, continuously re-calibrating and adjusting to the changing circumstances and eventually leading to a superior outcome. Today’s knowledge economy requires Fox-like approach and they intern will create the conditions for the future Hedgehogs to thrive. So, where do you fall on the Fox-Hedgehog scale? How do you deal with complex and uncertain situations? Do you use one style over the other or you use the combination of them based on the situation?
“Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful” - George E.P. Box
Models do not give you nicely packaged answers. Nor are all the models always right. They help you structure your thought process and help you find a solution. I started studying more about formal models in a course I took from University of Michigan on Coursera by Scott E Page. Scott is the Director of Center for Study of Complex Systems. I read a few of his books, one of them being Complex Adaptive Systems. In this book, I found the concept of Hedgehogs vs. Foxes to be intriguing. This concept seems to coincide with the manager vs. leader arguments I find in literature that I studied in the leadership class during my short stint at National University of Singapore.. In Complex Adaptive Systems, the concept I speak about talks about how the Fox knows many things but the hedgehog only knows one major thing. I focused on analyzing my thinking process and where I fall on the scale of fox/hedgehog. It is interesting to analyze who you are, so that you can stop trying to be who you are not.
If you analyze the three circles of the Hedgehog concept, it basically talks about analyzing your passions, your skills and what can give you economic satisfaction and then choosing something, which is the intersection of the three. I wrote another blog on “Anything Worth Doing is Worth Over Doing “which talks a little more about passion and how there is a feedback loop between passion and skills.
Philip Tetlock’s book "Expert Political Judgment", talks about idiosyncrasy and how erroneous 'expert' judgments about future events can be. Hedgehogs use only one model, while foxes use many informal models, as shown in the picture below. Isaiah Berlin (social and political theorist, philosopher and historian of ideas, "thought by many to be the dominant scholar of his generation") said, that Hedgehogs have just one, powerful response to a threat: they roll themselves into a ball, and present spikes to possible predators. Foxes, by contrast, draw on many different patterns of general understanding, making mistakes along the way without ever committing to a grand strategy; they have no single response to challenges. These differences between the expert and the generalist are what Tetlock used to name the two ends of the dimension of distinctive 'thinking styles' for future oriented complex problems. His book shows that one of these cognitive styles is superior to the other in predicting events and adapting to new information.
People with Hedgehog cognitive style are what I call “single minded people”. They like simple models, which are decisive and result in binary verdicts and are easily replicable. They don’t like multiple scenario models each with a different probability. They need established, uncontroversial models, which have examples of having succeeded in the past. They need approval of their peers and resist any argument contradicting the model. They basically need a sense of closure and finality in order to feel happy.
Foxes on the other hand do not commit to any one model and prefer to calibrate their insights based on many different perspectives. They adapt quickly to unexpected events and are tolerant to the idea of being challenged on what they believe to be true. They thrive in the face of uncertainty, and continuously adjust their responses, rather than sticking to a simple preset plan. Hedgehogs flourish in an environment with minimal uncertainties, while Foxes thrive in chaos.
Now, compare this to the theory of Managers vs. Leaders in the corporate world and you will see a lot of overlap. The concept of “targets and accountability” was made by and for Managers, who embody the characteristics of Hedgehogs. Leaders on the other hand, thrive in an uncertain environment much like the fox. Situations like a new product/business or there is a crisis, which needs to be handled by thinking outside the box. Managers are good at following the process that has already been laid out by leaders or improve the process for achieving efficiencies once the business has reached a certain level of predictability or a crisis has been resolved. Managers are good at “keeping the lights on” and will succumb if put in a novel situation or crisis for which they do not have direct experience dealing with.
In Silicon Valley you find three types of people:
1. People who work for large companies
2. Entrepreneurs who begin startups
3. People who work for startups
The first type is what I call Hedgehogs, for they need the predictability and stability of large companies to go about their life securely. They cannot handle waking up in the morning with the uncertainties that come with the world of startup companies. They serve a purpose as these large companies are doing what you call incremental innovation rather than cutting edge invention or innovation. Intrapreneurs are an exception to this, but that is a topic for another blog. Entrepreneurs are Foxes who thrive on the uncertainties of the startup world. They cannot stand the routines of working in a large company, and trust me they will go crazy. People who work for startups are somewhere in middle in that they are closer to Foxes but for various reasons, including lack of opportunity or a great idea of their own, they choose to work for a startup. Most of these guys do eventually end up creating their own start-up.
While Foxes are actively looking for opportunities to address complex problems and are always ready to jump onto the next big thing, Hedgehogs will not be able to recognize an opportunity even when it is presented to them Sometimes, even when explained about the opportunity and rewards, they will analyze the risks associated with it and choose to continue on the conservative path.
Unfortunately the world has become too complex for the Hedgehog’s style and we need Fox-like outlooks to deal with today’s problems. The problem with the Fox’s style is that it does not come with a neat, closed model, defined goals, and easy metrics like the Hedgehog does. It requires gradual iterations to move forward. The fox’s approach responds to new information, continuously re-calibrating and adjusting to the changing circumstances and eventually leading to a superior outcome. Today’s knowledge economy requires Fox-like approach and they intern will create the conditions for the future Hedgehogs to thrive. So, where do you fall on the Fox-Hedgehog scale? How do you deal with complex and uncertain situations? Do you use one style over the other or you use the combination of them based on the situation?
Great insight into the fox/hedgehog duality. We are definitely in need of foxes to pave the way for new hedgehogs, but with everything there is a balance. I wonder why you didn't mention Jim Collins' book? It is interesting to say that what was the cause for success in the 80's, does not necessarily translate to today's world. For example, there is an old Circuit City building here in my town that has been abandoned for nearly a decade. Everytime I drive past it, I am reminded of the hedgehog.
ReplyDeleteI think what we need more of at this time, are foxes with a desire to act as hedgehogs. although a fox can never become a hedgehog, they can incorporate some of the positive traits, thus becoming a more balanced fox with true grit.