Assignment 2 Instructions

Mental Models and Associated Behavioral Implications

Part I – Analyzing Mental Models from a personal perspective

Set up:

Be sure you have the “Neanderthal Debrief” reading handy to re-read if you need help doing
these items (see the Week 3 Readings content area).

Prompt # 1:

a. Have you ever known anyone with behaviors or traits that were very obvious to others,
but seemingly invisible to that person? Why do you think this was so? Might you have
similar blind spots about yourself, because they don’t match your self-perception?
Describe the example clearly and connect your reflection to the concepts from the
readings.
I have a friend who think she absolutely does no wrong. You can explain something to
her that she’s done wrong or rude, and she does not process the thought. In her eyes
she does not see a problem with anything she does. In fact she is able to justify all of her
wrong doings. I think that she knows what she was doing or said was wrong, but I think
that she won’t have any remorse if acknowledges what she’s done. There is a chance
where she could just be acting dumb, but I truly feel she knows what she’s doing is
wrong but does not want to feel bad by admitting it. I could potentially have similar blind
spots. In this case I feel that if someone was to correct me that I would change out of
embarrassment, but she does not seem to care.

Prompt # 2: Quoted from Hutchens (page 66), please write up a response to either item (a) or
item (b) below.

a. Think of a time (either personally or organizationally) when you did not get the results
you wanted. What were the specific actions you took that led to those results, and what
was your thinking at the time that caused you to take those actions? (It may be easier to
reflect on this with a friend, because it is often hard to see our own mental models.)

So I live a very structured life everything down to a morning routine to setting out plans
for the next two months. I am not very spontaneous, and don’t handle change very well.
So I was appointed to organize an event, and although it was planned very well I do not
plan very well for last minute changes. I set a high expectation for this event, and did not
expect to have any discrepancies. I did not plan for a problem and that’s exactly what
happened. I was told that I handled the situation the best I could, but it did leave some
people very unhappy. I gathered up other members of the committee for some input, and
we worked together to solve the issue. Although we did the best we could we were not
prepared for the issue that happened, and that was on my part. I had thought of the
fastest way to do something and not necessarily the most efficient way.

Prompt # 3: Quoted from Hutchens (page 66)

a. The next time you are personally offended or frustrated by someone’s comments, what
questions could you ask to better understand the other person’s mental models? How
could you help him or her do the same for you? Explain your answers.

1
 When you get offended or frustrated with someone’s comments whether the comments
are personal or indirect the best solution to better understand would be to openly talk
about it. Everyone has different ways to react to something and someone could be just
as uneasy making comments just as you were uneasy to hear the comment. You can
ask why they feel that way or why does it concern you? If the situation was turned
around you would want the same respect. So it would only be right that if you are
offended that you acknowledge it, and talk to the person about how you feel rather than
letting them get the satisfaction. Hopefully if you talk about it then they would feel
comfortable doing the same to you.

Prompt # 4: Quoted from Hutchens (page 68), please write up a response to the following:

Consider the “different towers with different views” metaphor as it applies to your own life. What
“towers” do you inhabit? To get your mind flowing, it may help you to think in terms of your
beliefs about, for example, how organizations should be run, or beliefs about leadership and
motivation, political ideology, theology, parenting style, etc.

Think through at least a few beliefs you hold. How has your tower view affected your life?
Have you changed a view? Also, comment on how your beliefs have led to disagreements
or impasses with others who inhabit “different towers with different views.”

My tower view has affected a majority of my life whether it was friends, family even down to the
smallest things like material items. I live a very spiritual life to where I value my faith first, and
that’s where the basis of my beliefs come from. It affects how I view friends and family, and it
affects even the smallest decisions in my life. It has led to a lot of disagreements throughout my
life which is why I choose to surround myself with people who have similar beliefs. I am not
someone to ever force my beliefs on someone, but I do ask that someone not degrade my
lifestyle because of my beliefs. Everyone has changing views, but I believe that having a base
for your views provides a sense of credibility and you have a more structured life.

Prompt # 5: Quoted from Hutchens (page 70), please write up a response to the following:

How can this self-reinforcing dynamic help in understanding, for example, racism? Generational
conflicts? “Problem children” in a family full of achievers? Companies that don’t change, even
though they’re losing customers?

We all view the world so differently, and our perceptions are only going to come from our
surroundings. If we don’t take the initiative to view the world in other people’s eyes then we will
only be blinded by the world around us. This falls into topics such as racism because people are
not able to see how others are treated, and cannot relate to those that have been oppressed. An
interesting way to look at this would be the example of a company that doesn’t change even
when they can see that they are losing customers. A business owner wants to believe that there
business is great so when they start to lose customers they think that it’s because of outside
reasoning and not necessarily that it’s the business itself. If you don’t take the time to see the
world in other people’s eyes than you just feed into your self-reinforcement.

Part II – Analyzing Mental Models from an organizational perspective

Remember, when you see the word “Organization” you can choose to think about a team, a
department, a whole company of any sort or other non-business organization (like family,

2
volunteer, civic, community, church, military, etc.) Consider the different levels as you work
through these questions.

Prompt # 6: Prompt 6 has five parts / sub-questions. First, identify the organization you are
choosing for this assignment then write up a response to the following:

Pinal County Junior Livestock Association: a nonprofit I was heavily involved with.

1) What are some mental models that your organization may hold about its role in the
world?

We are the only livestock association in the county. We have been putting on stock
shows the longest on a state level. We are the only association that works with local 4-h
and ffa chapters.

2) How might you and your other organization members begin surfacing and testing some
of your organization’s mental models.

Every year the PCJLC runs a statistic along with the other counties in the states to see
where we are all at when it comes to participation, financial income, and community
support. We work closely with parents and leaders in the community so honor the
feedback that is given throughout the fiscal year. We have a committee made up of
volunteers, and we ask that they all make an effort to work with individuals in better
communicating with the needs of the community.

3) What are some of your organization’s biggest challenges? How might untested mental
models be contributing to the problem?

Some of the organizations biggest challenges would be the outside perception. People
don’t really view the committee as a good entity. They see it as a political advantage,
and those who are on the committee have an advantage when it comes to the stock
shows. An untested mental model would be asking the public how they feel about the
volunteers. A lot of parents talk amongst each other about things they feel are issues,
but the parents never talk to the actual committee about their concerns. We can’t
address anything unless it is brought to our attention.

4) Cite an example or two of times that your organization has set in motion a self-fulfilling
prophecy, in which the group’s belief in something actually made that something come
true.

So the committee’s main goal is to organize the fair, and ultimately help the kids showing
their animals make the best profit. Every year we have our annual May meeting a month
after the previous fair to discuss the earnings, and every year we set a new goal to try
and beat that year’s earnings by ten percent. And as long as I have been on the
committee we have accomplished that goal. I believe that is our committees self-fulfilling
prophecy.

5) Review the material on the Ladder of Inference (page 72 from the Neanderthal Debrief
document in the Readings content area of Week 3). Cite a recent conflict that took place
in your organization in which someone hastily climbed up the ladder and “jumped” to
conclusions about someone else. TRACE THE STEPS OF THE LADDER. That is, for
this item, clearly demonstrate that you’ve tied your situation to the steps of the ladder…
demonstrate you read and understood the steps and can apply them.

A rule was being changed to favor someone’s position.

3
 Select data: someone starts a rumor about the new rule proposal to favor someone’s
future position.
Add meaning: The person who started the rumor digs for evidence outside from the
actual sources.
Make assumptions: Doesn’t ask the person, instead talks to everyone else.
Draw conclusions: After making an assumption the person feels there is enough
evidence to draw a conclusion.
Adopt belief: takes it upon himself to address the problem to the committee still without
consulting the person.
Takes actions: Brings it up to the president to take action and stop the proposal.
Get results: the person who proposed the rule was able to make a case for the change
and we voted as a committee, and the person who started the rumor loss.

6) Review the guidelines for making your thinking explicit (the bullet points on pages 75-77
from the Neanderthal Debrief document in the Readings content area of Week 3). With
the conflict you identified in item 5 (above) write down the kinds of questions and the
kinds of statements that would make your thinking about the conflict explicit. Stick with
it, you can do it!

Can I ask why you are accusing me of using this organization for a higher position?
Why did you not address me?
Why did you take it to the extent of contacting the President of the committee before
contacting myself?
Would this rule change affect you personally?

Part III – Textbook Readings Connections

For this part of the assignment, please refer to Chapter 5 in your textbook.

Prompt # 7: Prompt 7 has four parts. Briefly define each of the following concepts and make
some connections / relate each concept to some aspect of the Tales of the Neanderthal story.

1) Primacy Effect

Primacy effect in this case was when Boogie found out that there were other people in
the world. He was very anxious to tell the others that when the old man told him to wait
he was discouraged. He could have learned so much more if he would have taken his
time instead of making assumptions and leaving.

2) False Consensus Bias

This was when the tribes were deciding on whether to hunt or gather berries. One tribe
saw a lot of opportunity to hunt. While the other saw a greater opportunity to gather.
Instead of talking about each other’s views they stuck to what they were only able to
see.

3) Confirmation Bias

When the cavemen were chasing the shadows they only reacted to chasing the
butterflies because that is all they had known. But when the giraffe stomped on the
warthog they did not react, because they did not know what was going on. Instead of
figuring it out they just stuck to what they believed in and knew.
4
4) Fundamental Attribution Error

This was like when the two tribes started to call each other names, they both thought
that they had different opinions because of their personalities and not because of their
situations.