WEBVTT - Harvard's Mansharamani on New Book

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:03.680
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Masser and

0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>Jason Kelly on Bloomberg Radio. I just wrot through some

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>statistics at everybody, because the World Economic Forum recently did

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:12.959
<v Speaker 1>this last year about the amount of data generated every day.

0:00:13.200 --> 0:00:18.320
<v Speaker 1>Every day, five hundred million tweets are sent, two emails

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.160
<v Speaker 1>are sent every day, four terabytes of data are created

0:00:22.200 --> 0:00:25.239
<v Speaker 1>from each connected car. I mean, this is just a

0:00:25.320 --> 0:00:27.880
<v Speaker 1>little taste of the amount of data that is being

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:30.080
<v Speaker 1>done on a daily basis. It's a lot, and we

0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:34.160
<v Speaker 1>are dealing with that deluge every moment of our day.

0:00:34.320 --> 0:00:38.760
<v Speaker 1>Vicram Mancherani man sar Amani excuse me, is a lecture

0:00:38.800 --> 0:00:41.000
<v Speaker 1>at Harvard University, and he's got a new book app

0:00:41.320 --> 0:00:43.960
<v Speaker 1>It's really about how to step away from some of that.

0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:47.360
<v Speaker 1>It's entitled Think for Yourself, Restoring Common Sense in an

0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:50.199
<v Speaker 1>Age of Experts and Artificial Intelligence. And he joins us

0:00:50.560 --> 0:00:53.760
<v Speaker 1>on the phone in Lexington, Massachusetts. Vicram, forgive me, I

0:00:53.920 --> 0:00:57.240
<v Speaker 1>mangled your name and I really apologize for that. UM,

0:00:57.280 --> 0:00:59.600
<v Speaker 1>I need some data help on that. UM, tell us

0:00:59.600 --> 0:01:03.760
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of about this book. Why write it? Sure? So?

0:01:03.960 --> 0:01:05.920
<v Speaker 1>Part of it is that I think all of us

0:01:05.959 --> 0:01:10.200
<v Speaker 1>are now suffering from not only this information overload and

0:01:10.280 --> 0:01:13.560
<v Speaker 1>data deluge that you refer to, but it's recreating this

0:01:13.720 --> 0:01:18.120
<v Speaker 1>desire for optimization and everything we do. And so that

0:01:18.360 --> 0:01:22.360
<v Speaker 1>desire has led us to stop thinking. We've run headlong

0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:26.440
<v Speaker 1>into the arms of experts and technologies that promised to

0:01:26.520 --> 0:01:29.880
<v Speaker 1>help us overcome this fear of missing out on the

0:01:29.920 --> 0:01:33.280
<v Speaker 1>optimal choice, and so we've stopped thinking. And so my

0:01:33.520 --> 0:01:36.319
<v Speaker 1>book is really a call to sort of take a

0:01:36.360 --> 0:01:40.160
<v Speaker 1>step back and start reclaiming some of the autonomy we've

0:01:40.160 --> 0:01:44.000
<v Speaker 1>given up in this process. And it's not just from technology.

0:01:44.360 --> 0:01:48.200
<v Speaker 1>It's also from experts, whether they're your doctor or your

0:01:48.240 --> 0:01:52.120
<v Speaker 1>financial advisor or etcetera. But it's to change the nature

0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:55.480
<v Speaker 1>of those relationships. And one of the things you say, Vicram,

0:01:55.520 --> 0:01:57.400
<v Speaker 1>is that we need to keep experts on tapped, but

0:01:57.440 --> 0:02:01.080
<v Speaker 1>not on top. What does that mean? Yeah, look, that's

0:02:01.080 --> 0:02:03.400
<v Speaker 1>a great point. I mean the reason I say that

0:02:04.040 --> 0:02:07.120
<v Speaker 1>is I think for too long we've bounced like a

0:02:07.200 --> 0:02:12.320
<v Speaker 1>ping pong ball between complete dismissal of experts and blind

0:02:12.520 --> 0:02:17.080
<v Speaker 1>deferral to experts. What I'm suggesting is a nuanced middle ground,

0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:19.760
<v Speaker 1>one in which we are able to tap into the

0:02:19.919 --> 0:02:23.359
<v Speaker 1>value that experts have and bring to the table. They

0:02:23.440 --> 0:02:26.720
<v Speaker 1>obviously know a lot about their domains of expertise, more

0:02:26.800 --> 0:02:28.720
<v Speaker 1>than a lot of us will ever know, and so

0:02:28.800 --> 0:02:31.520
<v Speaker 1>we shouldn't dismiss them. But at the same time, they

0:02:31.560 --> 0:02:34.200
<v Speaker 1>don't have an appreciation for the context that each of

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:37.600
<v Speaker 1>us faces in our decision making, and so we shouldn't

0:02:37.600 --> 0:02:41.480
<v Speaker 1>defer to them either. So neither dismiss nor defer. Keep

0:02:41.560 --> 0:02:44.080
<v Speaker 1>them on tap, but not on top. You know, it's

0:02:44.120 --> 0:02:46.520
<v Speaker 1>so interesting, especially if you know, in a time where

0:02:46.560 --> 0:02:50.440
<v Speaker 1>we're talking so much about inequalities and we're talking about

0:02:50.480 --> 0:02:54.080
<v Speaker 1>how the data has shown that diversity makes a difference,

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:57.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, in terms of financial performances at firms, you know,

0:02:57.919 --> 0:03:00.840
<v Speaker 1>having diversity of thought it's just so much more rewarding,

0:03:01.280 --> 0:03:04.639
<v Speaker 1>certainly for a culture, but also financially for a company.

0:03:04.680 --> 0:03:08.600
<v Speaker 1>How do you find the balance between data and kind

0:03:08.600 --> 0:03:11.320
<v Speaker 1>of gut and common sense, trusting your own data set

0:03:11.320 --> 0:03:13.960
<v Speaker 1>of knowledge, Sure so, kind of. One of the things

0:03:14.040 --> 0:03:15.760
<v Speaker 1>I say in the book, and that I really believe,

0:03:15.919 --> 0:03:21.840
<v Speaker 1>is that every single perspective is biased, incomplete, and limited,

0:03:22.360 --> 0:03:25.320
<v Speaker 1>and as such, the best way to proceed is to

0:03:25.440 --> 0:03:30.040
<v Speaker 1>triangulate by using multiple perspectives. Now, in terms of diversity.

0:03:30.080 --> 0:03:32.960
<v Speaker 1>That means anyone who brings a different perspective other than

0:03:33.000 --> 0:03:36.520
<v Speaker 1>your own is additive. And so I'm a big believer

0:03:36.640 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 1>in diversity because it makes a great deal of sense

0:03:39.160 --> 0:03:42.360
<v Speaker 1>in making better decisions. Uh So, so that's one thing.

0:03:42.640 --> 0:03:45.320
<v Speaker 1>Now in terms of data and how we use it.

0:03:45.760 --> 0:03:47.960
<v Speaker 1>You know, lots of people will say there are lies,

0:03:48.480 --> 0:03:52.520
<v Speaker 1>damn lives and statistics, and there's a little bit of

0:03:52.520 --> 0:03:54.520
<v Speaker 1>truth to that in the sense that a lot of

0:03:54.520 --> 0:03:58.040
<v Speaker 1>the data can be manipulated. So it's the context of

0:03:58.120 --> 0:04:01.040
<v Speaker 1>the data that really matters. It's they to connect the

0:04:01.080 --> 0:04:04.760
<v Speaker 1>dots across disparate data sets. That's where I believe the

0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:08.960
<v Speaker 1>value is moving. And so rather than focus on generating dots,

0:04:09.200 --> 0:04:10.800
<v Speaker 1>I think we should all spend a little more time

0:04:10.840 --> 0:04:14.960
<v Speaker 1>connecting dots. Vicram teach us, help us understand how to

0:04:15.000 --> 0:04:18.400
<v Speaker 1>be better in this world because we are, in fact inundated.

0:04:18.800 --> 0:04:21.039
<v Speaker 1>We are facing this problem. I know I am, and

0:04:21.160 --> 0:04:23.039
<v Speaker 1>I think I can speak for my partner too. What

0:04:23.080 --> 0:04:25.520
<v Speaker 1>do we do well? You know, one of the things

0:04:25.720 --> 0:04:28.479
<v Speaker 1>but not highly recommend all of us do, is to

0:04:28.880 --> 0:04:33.520
<v Speaker 1>always seek disagreement. So not just get the advice of

0:04:33.600 --> 0:04:36.279
<v Speaker 1>one person, but get someone who can disagree with that

0:04:36.400 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 1>expert and give you both sides of an argument. And

0:04:40.000 --> 0:04:43.000
<v Speaker 1>I think it really is a useful way to sort

0:04:43.000 --> 0:04:45.760
<v Speaker 1>of help people make better decisions in the face of uncertainty.

0:04:46.120 --> 0:04:49.000
<v Speaker 1>And it reminds me of that that Alfred Sloan quote

0:04:49.000 --> 0:04:51.960
<v Speaker 1>which is so famous. You know Alfred Sloane, the former

0:04:52.040 --> 0:04:55.320
<v Speaker 1>chairman of General Motors. You know, he comes into a

0:04:55.360 --> 0:04:57.880
<v Speaker 1>boardroom meeting and he has a discussion and he says,

0:04:57.920 --> 0:04:59.200
<v Speaker 1>General and want to take it. We're all in the

0:04:59.240 --> 0:05:01.760
<v Speaker 1>complete agreement about this decision. And he looks around and

0:05:01.800 --> 0:05:04.200
<v Speaker 1>he sees everyone's head this sort of nodding in agreement,

0:05:04.760 --> 0:05:07.400
<v Speaker 1>and his answer is, well, then I propose we postponed

0:05:07.480 --> 0:05:10.200
<v Speaker 1>further discussion on this matter to give ourselves time to

0:05:10.320 --> 0:05:14.160
<v Speaker 1>develop disagreement and perhaps gained some understanding of what the

0:05:14.240 --> 0:05:17.159
<v Speaker 1>decision is all about. And I think that captures the

0:05:17.240 --> 0:05:20.360
<v Speaker 1>essence of it, that you really can't appreciate the complexities

0:05:20.440 --> 0:05:22.120
<v Speaker 1>if you have one side of a story. You know,

0:05:22.240 --> 0:05:24.560
<v Speaker 1>it's so interesting. It's like journalism one oh one. And

0:05:24.600 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 1>I feel like when I was kind of starting my career,

0:05:28.000 --> 0:05:30.800
<v Speaker 1>I would do a story and it was imperative that

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:33.640
<v Speaker 1>you've got both sides of the story, and you presented

0:05:34.240 --> 0:05:37.080
<v Speaker 1>that way to hopefully let the audience see both sides,

0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:40.760
<v Speaker 1>or your viewers or your listeners and and make a decision,

0:05:40.839 --> 0:05:44.000
<v Speaker 1>but make an informed decision. You know, something's happened that

0:05:44.120 --> 0:05:47.120
<v Speaker 1>Vicram in our world where people like we see this

0:05:47.200 --> 0:05:50.200
<v Speaker 1>on colleges and universities, people are afraid to have diversity

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 1>of thought speakers who are controversial, you know, students protest,

0:05:54.440 --> 0:05:57.360
<v Speaker 1>and then the colleges don't have those speakers. And I thought,

0:05:57.680 --> 0:05:59.360
<v Speaker 1>isn't that how we open up our minds. We may

0:05:59.400 --> 0:06:03.239
<v Speaker 1>not agree, we may you know, strongly disagree with someone,

0:06:03.520 --> 0:06:05.799
<v Speaker 1>but isn't that what the world is supposed to be about,

0:06:05.800 --> 0:06:08.120
<v Speaker 1>that we hear different thought, diversity of thought, and that

0:06:08.160 --> 0:06:11.240
<v Speaker 1>we are all are smarter as a result. Yeah, Carol,

0:06:11.240 --> 0:06:12.840
<v Speaker 1>I think you hit the nail on the head. I mean,

0:06:12.839 --> 0:06:15.480
<v Speaker 1>this is really about critical thinking and being able to

0:06:15.600 --> 0:06:18.520
<v Speaker 1>step back and see both the pros and cons of

0:06:18.560 --> 0:06:22.839
<v Speaker 1>every decision, and so closing our eyes to different opinions

0:06:22.960 --> 0:06:25.960
<v Speaker 1>is not a useful process. And so I fully agree

0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:27.719
<v Speaker 1>with what you're saying here that you know you should

0:06:27.720 --> 0:06:31.200
<v Speaker 1>be open minded. I'm not suggesting everyone agree with everything

0:06:31.240 --> 0:06:34.320
<v Speaker 1>that's said by someone they don't, you know, naturally tap into.

0:06:34.560 --> 0:06:36.640
<v Speaker 1>But you should shoot the argument and then you make

0:06:36.680 --> 0:06:39.200
<v Speaker 1>your own decision and then you think for yourself. That's

0:06:39.240 --> 0:06:42.000
<v Speaker 1>why I love always seek a disagreement. I I think

0:06:42.040 --> 0:06:44.120
<v Speaker 1>that is such a smart thing. You can always come

0:06:44.160 --> 0:06:47.039
<v Speaker 1>to me, you can always come to make Carol, I

0:06:47.120 --> 0:06:49.520
<v Speaker 1>was gonna say, it's why it works. No, that's why

0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:51.800
<v Speaker 1>it works. Um. So vickerm, I have to ask you.

0:06:51.800 --> 0:06:54.520
<v Speaker 1>You know, we're living in this topsy turvy upside down

0:06:54.600 --> 0:06:57.880
<v Speaker 1>world where you know, our communication is different than it

0:06:58.000 --> 0:07:00.640
<v Speaker 1>was before. You know, Carol and I, who you know,

0:07:00.800 --> 0:07:03.680
<v Speaker 1>spent a couple of years in studio together about six

0:07:03.720 --> 0:07:08.279
<v Speaker 1>ft from each other, um, sometimes closer our desks. You know,

0:07:08.320 --> 0:07:11.840
<v Speaker 1>we work at Blueberg and we're all, you know, right together. Um.

0:07:11.920 --> 0:07:14.680
<v Speaker 1>And now we are literally, you know, a hundred miles

0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:16.920
<v Speaker 1>maybe not a hundred fifty miles away from each other

0:07:17.160 --> 0:07:19.680
<v Speaker 1>and we can see each other via video conference. And

0:07:19.720 --> 0:07:25.280
<v Speaker 1>that's it. Um, what has this done to us? Granted

0:07:25.280 --> 0:07:29.360
<v Speaker 1>we're connection connected by technology, but you know, part of

0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:33.560
<v Speaker 1>thinking for yourself and taking in all of the interesting

0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:37.800
<v Speaker 1>perspectives I feel like is being able to see those

0:07:37.840 --> 0:07:40.320
<v Speaker 1>social cues and body language and all those different things.

0:07:40.360 --> 0:07:42.880
<v Speaker 1>So how does this affect the way that we move

0:07:42.960 --> 0:07:47.720
<v Speaker 1>forward here? You know, I think there's some cross currents here,

0:07:48.000 --> 0:07:51.760
<v Speaker 1>universally positive or universally negative. I mean, the fact that

0:07:51.880 --> 0:07:54.720
<v Speaker 1>I can have in my class that I'm teaching virtually

0:07:55.320 --> 0:07:59.920
<v Speaker 1>UH guests visiting from China or or from Latin America

0:08:00.040 --> 0:08:03.480
<v Speaker 1>UH allows a diversity of thinking that I couldn't bring

0:08:03.520 --> 0:08:07.720
<v Speaker 1>into an in class in person class. Yet at the

0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:10.680
<v Speaker 1>same time, when you're virtual rather than in the classroom

0:08:10.680 --> 0:08:13.200
<v Speaker 1>with your peers, you're learning differently. You're not getting the

0:08:13.240 --> 0:08:16.080
<v Speaker 1>same cues. So I think we're sort of expanding the

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:19.960
<v Speaker 1>pie of opinions at the same time as perhaps getting

0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:22.440
<v Speaker 1>fewer of the cues that you might get in person.

0:08:22.880 --> 0:08:24.640
<v Speaker 1>And so, you know, I think there's some cross currents.

0:08:24.680 --> 0:08:27.720
<v Speaker 1>I don't think there's a universal answer to that question. So, oh,

0:08:27.760 --> 0:08:30.520
<v Speaker 1>go ahead, Jason, Well, I just have one one question

0:08:30.560 --> 0:08:39.280
<v Speaker 1>that cue Wing like apart um, I mean, victorm. The

0:08:39.280 --> 0:08:41.520
<v Speaker 1>one thing that does occur to me though, as you're talking,

0:08:41.720 --> 0:08:45.240
<v Speaker 1>is this notion that if you are seeking a diversity

0:08:45.280 --> 0:08:48.640
<v Speaker 1>of opinions, which is great, you can paralyze yourself though,

0:08:48.640 --> 0:08:50.679
<v Speaker 1>And so how do you think you're out a way

0:08:50.720 --> 0:08:54.240
<v Speaker 1>to be decisive while at the same time sort of

0:08:54.280 --> 0:08:59.440
<v Speaker 1>aggregating these opinions. Yeah, so this is ultimately the part

0:08:59.520 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 1>that I think we've started hinting at, which is one

0:09:01.800 --> 0:09:05.200
<v Speaker 1>needs to be mindful of the process you're using. So

0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:09.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm okay with you deferring to your GPS device, just

0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:12.280
<v Speaker 1>be aware that you're doing it. I'm okay with you

0:09:12.400 --> 0:09:15.480
<v Speaker 1>listening blindly to what your doctor's recommendations are much and

0:09:15.559 --> 0:09:18.280
<v Speaker 1>not blindly, but listening to your doctor's recognitions. But I

0:09:18.320 --> 0:09:21.280
<v Speaker 1>want you to do so mindfully rather than as a

0:09:21.400 --> 0:09:25.240
<v Speaker 1>default operating condition where you don't think about it. And so,

0:09:25.440 --> 0:09:27.319
<v Speaker 1>you know, in the book I mentioned, there's a professor

0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:30.920
<v Speaker 1>at Stanford Universities names Baba shift Um, and he and

0:09:30.960 --> 0:09:34.240
<v Speaker 1>his wife had a cancer diagnosis and they proactively decided

0:09:34.280 --> 0:09:36.600
<v Speaker 1>to give up control, and so they spent I think

0:09:36.600 --> 0:09:39.000
<v Speaker 1>more time thinking about who to give up the control too,

0:09:39.679 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 1>rather than giving you know, fighting each decision. And so

0:09:43.280 --> 0:09:45.240
<v Speaker 1>sometimes it's okay to take, you know, get out of

0:09:45.240 --> 0:09:47.440
<v Speaker 1>the driver's seat. So that's one thing. And the other

0:09:47.480 --> 0:09:49.920
<v Speaker 1>thing I would suggest, which I don't think is particularly unique,

0:09:49.920 --> 0:09:53.360
<v Speaker 1>but you know, thinking in terms of scenarios for the future,

0:09:53.920 --> 0:09:55.880
<v Speaker 1>and then the part that I do think is more

0:09:55.960 --> 0:09:59.559
<v Speaker 1>unique in my recommendation is imagine failure in each of

0:09:59.559 --> 0:10:03.480
<v Speaker 1>those and areas. Because when you imagine failure and the

0:10:03.520 --> 0:10:07.000
<v Speaker 1>path that could lead to potential future failure, you're less

0:10:07.040 --> 0:10:11.000
<v Speaker 1>likely to fail because of those reasons. So it's sort

0:10:11.000 --> 0:10:14.000
<v Speaker 1>of twisting the logic on its head. It's sort of saying, hey,

0:10:14.080 --> 0:10:16.800
<v Speaker 1>scenario plan and think about five possible scenarios of what

0:10:16.880 --> 0:10:20.439
<v Speaker 1>might happen in the world to saying here's five possible

0:10:20.559 --> 0:10:22.880
<v Speaker 1>choices you could make, and here's how they could all

0:10:22.920 --> 0:10:25.440
<v Speaker 1>go wrong. And when you focus on the reasons they

0:10:25.440 --> 0:10:28.680
<v Speaker 1>could go wrong, you're less likely to have those reasons

0:10:28.679 --> 0:10:32.160
<v Speaker 1>go wrong. So that so so yeah, I mean those

0:10:32.160 --> 0:10:34.280
<v Speaker 1>are some strategies that I recommended. Oh my god, we

0:10:34.320 --> 0:10:37.360
<v Speaker 1>could talk forever. Yeah, this is really and I feel

0:10:37.360 --> 0:10:40.319
<v Speaker 1>like it's very applicable to the environment wherein right now,

0:10:40.320 --> 0:10:44.200
<v Speaker 1>where we're being bombarded by so much information and trying

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:46.280
<v Speaker 1>to figure out the best and smart uh you know,

0:10:46.600 --> 0:10:49.679
<v Speaker 1>decisions and way forward. So um, hopefully you can come

0:10:49.679 --> 0:10:53.200
<v Speaker 1>back and we can continue this conversation. Vicram Mance Romani

0:10:53.640 --> 0:10:56.680
<v Speaker 1>is a lecture at Harvard University. Check out his latest

0:10:56.720 --> 0:11:00.000
<v Speaker 1>book it's new. It's just out. It's entitled Think for Yourself,

0:11:00.040 --> 0:11:03.239
<v Speaker 1>Restoring common sense and an age of experts and artificial intelligence.