Mark Uychoco

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: Quoted from Hutchens (page 65), please write up a response to either item (a)
or item (b) below.

a. Think of a comment that a spouse, partner, or colleague has made about you that you
found disturbing or frustrating. After reflecting on the comment, do you find that there
is any truth in it? How hard was it initially for you to consider that the comment may be
accurate? How might the concepts presented in the Johari Window apply? Describe the
comment/situation clearly. Don’t ramble but do connect your reflective comments to
concepts from the readings.

The comment I am thinking of in particular comes from my wife. In times that she is
frusterated, she will say that I am not pulling my weight around the house and am not
being supportive at home. My first internal response to this, “yes, I do help,” but then
when I really sit down and think, I could be doing more and there is a little bit of truth to
her statement. During the evenings, when we both are home, my wife is the one
cooking/cleaning up. I could and should be lending a hand. That would eliminate her
stress and leave us time in the evening to unwind together.

Initially, this comment was hard for me to take; I do help, but I realize that I do not show
support in the way that my wife needed me to. I did things that were not high on the
priority list, leaving more for her to do. This situation is best represented by the blind
section of the Johari Window. “The blind area represents the part of yourself that others
can see, but you are not aware of” (McCann, 44). My wife saw that I was not helping out
and saw an area of myself that needed improvement. I, on the other hand, was unaware.
For a while, I consistently rejected her feedback so I had trouble reducing the size of my
blind area.

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 when you, or a group you were associated with, excelled by adopting a
new mental model. Explain the time clearly and connect to the readings.

During my time as a manager at Starbucks, our mental model was to ask a lot of ‘why’
questions, and to keep asking ‘why’ until we got the answer that we wanted. If a fellow
partner was doing something incorrectly, we would ask them why they were doing it that
way. In turn, they would become defensive because they thought that they were in
trouble and felt threatened. When in reality, all that I was trying to do was to understand
why they were doing what they were doing. By asking ‘why’, we discovered that asking
put them in a threat state. Thus, they would become defensive and their answers were
not as honest as we needed them to be. We realized that this model of asking ‘why’ was
not as effective as we had hoped it would be.

1
 In turn, we adopted a more growth state model. In a growth mindset we asked a lot of
‘how’ and ‘what’ questions. By asking a lot of ‘how’ and ‘what’ questions, it helped the
subject generate insight. By generating insight they sometimes found that ‘a-ha’ moment
and gave a little commitment to how they were going to change. In the same instance, if
someone was doing a routine incorrectly, then I would ask, ‘what is the routine?’ to see if
there is a knowledge gap or a will gap. That answer will determine my next set of
questions. This is most connected to the principle of commitment. I stay consistent in
asking these ‘how’ and ‘what’ questions. By asking these questions, I have gotten more
comfortable and my partners know what to expect and how to best answer these
questions; “it helped promote a sense of safety and trust in a relationship” (McCann,
155). At first, approaching this new mental model, and changing behaviors was difficult.
With a lot of practice, it became easier, and my partners felt more safe and respected. It
put them less in a threat state and more in a growth mind state. The team felt more
valued because they were generating insight. We all excelled because it made my job a
little easier by making these commitments.

Prompt # 3: Quoted from Hutchens (page 66), please write up a response to either item (a)
or item (b) below.

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.

The next time I feel an emotional response to someone’s comments or feedback, the first
thing I need to do is remember that thoughts influence our emotions. I need to
understand how I feel in the situation and how the other person views me. Sometimes I
over generalize, “exaggerating the frequency of an event” (McCann, 90). I need to
understand that when I go to over generalization, I am not in the right state of mind to
respond to the comment or feedback. I am over thinking the said comment, and cannot
fathom a chance to understand where they are coming from. After understanding where
they are coming from, some questions I could ask are how they would like me to change,
or ask what I am doing that is frustrating them. By asking these questions, I can better
understand how others view me and how I could change to benefit us both.

A way that I can help others is to ask questions around empathy. “Empathy is having an
understanding of what it feels like to be in that position” (McCann, 106). I need to ask
questions so that way they can understand why I feel the way that I do. The way that I
could help them do the same is to let them know what my mental model is, and they can
ask questions around that. I can be transparent about my mental model and be open
minded to change my mental model when needed.

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.”

2
When thinking of two different towers, parenting comes to mind. Generally, my wife and I are
viewing life from the same tower. We are both very open minded when it comes to parenting our
son. We see the entire landscape from above and try our best to see obstacles as they approach.
We both are more on the side of “letting him be”, instead of overly coddling him. Generally, this
open minded tower view has translated well to life as a whole. By being open minded, I see life
and it’s obstacles from all angles. This helps me to be non-judgmental and patient and
understanding with others.

I try very hard to understand others and realize that we all live life with different tower views,
but sometimes it can be hard to settle with someone who sees life differently. One example of
this is that our son still sleeps in bed with us. To a lot of people, the whole co-sleeping idea is
terrible and weird. To us, it works. If it works, what can be so bad about it? When it comes to
parenting, everyone has such different tower views. Instead of understanding each view, people
tend to throw judgement instead. Can’t we all just come to agreement that parenting is hard,
fun, and widely unique? There is no right way to do something when it comes to parenting; you
do whatever works.

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?

This self-reinforcing phenomenon is all too real, especially when it comes to racism. Everyone
has these negative notions and stereotypes of others that they think are true for everyone. A
perfect example of this is when people say “all African Americans are gang bangers,” or when
our president thinks that all Hispanic people are bringing drugs into our country and
committing crime. These are not facts, they are opinions, and these opinions get people into
trouble. By putting one race into one bubble, people are doing a huge disservice to an entire
population. We do not take the time to understand people anymore. We lump everyone together
in the same problem and do not work together to find a solution.

I live in Chicago and I am sure everyone thinks of Chicago as a very dangerous place. They think
there are shootings everywhere and that the South Side is an actual war zone. The media paints
this same picture. They only showcase the carnage coming from the South Side, but not the
works of humanity. There are numerous organizations helping kids and families, but why would
the media report on the good things when their story about another shooting could generate a
million comments on Facebook.

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,
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:

Organization – my family

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

3
 Mental models that exist in my family center around contribution and being positive in
life. I strive to raise my children to believe that things are earned and not given, and this
will help them to work hard in life. I want them to understand multi-culturalism. The
world is a very big place, filled with so much diversity. By raising my children to accept
this fact, they will not fall into one bias and will see the world in a much broader scope.
They will have a flexible ethnocentrism and will be more aware of their surroundings. My
wife and I both agree that we want our son to be around those who are different than
him; we do not want him to only see one color. Our hope is that this will help him to be
understanding of others and go through life with a non-judgmental and positive attitude.

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

My wife and I are on the same page when it comes to exposing our son to diversity.
When we were looking to buy a house, we wanted to make sure that we were in an area of
diversity. We live in Rogers Park, which just so happens to be Chicago’s most diverse
neighborhood. By living here, our son will see all walks of life right outside his window. I
think that it is important that we raise him to be colorblind. We treat people with respect
and take in a lot of culture, and hope that this will rub off on him. By exposing him to our
mental model, we hope that he will view the world through the same scope.

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

A challenge that my wife and I face is accepting feedback regarding our parenting style.
By no means do we have an ‘out-there’ approach, but we are very laid back and we do
what works for us. The dreaded co-sleeping idea comes into question here. Our parents,
and friends tend to roll their eyes when we say our son is still sleeping in bed with us.
“He has a beautiful crib” they will say or, “he is still sleeping with you?” We do what
works. Eventually he won’t need us, but why can’t we enjoy it right now?

When we receive feedback that does not line up with what we think, we tend to brush it
off and get defensive, especially with our parents. Our parents should be the last people
we get frustrated with because they do a lot for us. We all need to do a better job
accepting our mental models when it comes to parenting. At the end of the day, we all
want what is best for our son, and that is one notion we all can agree on.

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.

My wife and I try very hard to support each other and better each other. We have always
come from a place of wanting each other to be better. After my wife graduated from
college with a journalism degree, she wanted to move to Los Angeles and attempt to live
out her dream of working and writing about the entertainment industry. So off to
California we went. We lived there for three years, and in those three years she lost a part
of herself. The work wasn’t what she had hoped for, and she saw the industry for what it
was – self-absorbed. After mulling over what to do next, we decided to move back home
to Chicago so we both could pursue a new future around those we loved. As soon as we
moved back, everything changed for the better because we believed that we could do
better. My wife found a job she loved, working with adults with disabilities (a far stretch
from entertainment journalism), I excelled and promoted within Starbucks, and our
story kept up with our wants and desires. Our story really writes itself, we moved back
home, and everything was better and we were both happier. We got engaged, married,

4
 bought a house, and had a baby. We continually strive to better each other and we hope
that our children will see that and learn positively from it.

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 recent conflict actually sounds quite silly when I type it out, but my wife and I argued
about the breakfast that my son eats. He seems to only eat French toast sticks every
single morning. I hasty made the decision to throw them in the garbage because every
time I am around or ask what he ate, the answer is always French toast sticks. In
hindsight, that is not all that he eats for breakfast. I am only around 2 of the 7 mornings,
and he does not only eat French toast sticks.

This conflict, as it relates to the ladder of inference –

I select data – Freddie only eats French toast sticks
I add meaning – he is only getting offered sugary French toast sticks every
morning, there is no way anyone else could be offering him something different
I make assumptions – nobody bothers to feed him anything else except for
French toast sticks
I draw conclusions – if I throw away the French toast sticks, they cannot be
offered anymore
I adopt beliefs – Freddie cannot eat French toast sticks for breakfast anymore
I take action – I do throw away the French toast sticks
I get results – Freddie does not eat French toast sticks because there are none to
be offered to him

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!

With the conflict I identified above, some of the questions I would ask are, “is Freddie
only eating French toast sticks in the morning?” “what else does he eat?” “is French toast
the only thing available for breakfast?” “Do we need to have a better variety for the
morning?” “Do we give ourselves enough time to make breakfast instead of offering
microwaveable food?”

By asking these questions, my wife and I can come up with solutions. We can provide
other options in the morning that are easy to prepare. I see French toast sticks as
unhealthy and full of sugar. I want him to eat healthy as much as we can control it. By
getting rid of French toast sticks and having other choices available, he can be heathier.

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.

5
1) Primacy Effect

Primacy effect is proving that people may pay more attention to the first information
they receive about a person or a situation, than they do to later information (Petty and
Cacioppo, 1986, McCann, 119). When it comes to the Tales of the Neanderthal, the
people living in the cave believed that the outside world was a bad and scary place. They
believed that information and did not want to believe anything otherwise.

2) False Consensus Bias

False consensus bias is our mistaken assumption that others share our view points,
attributes and beliefs (McCann, 122). The others in the cave all had different beliefs
about the outside world, concluding that they could not leave the cave. Boogie then
started to have different thoughts and wanted to leave the cave. When he expressed that
thought, the others condemned him because they thought he shared their same belief;
they felt betrayed.

3) Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is our tendency to seek out and pay attention to information that
supports what we already believe and simultaneously to ignore or reject contradictory
information (McCann, 121). Everyone in the cave thought that their personal beliefs were
the truth. When they saw shadows or heard voices, they never investigated because of
their beliefs and their first information. When Boogie wanted to go outside they rejected
the idea that anything good would come of his exploration.

4) Fundamental Attribution Error

Fundamental attribution error is our human tendency to assume that other people’s
behavior is due to something about their personality, while at the same time failing to
consider possible situational influences (McCann, 124). When Boogie started questioning
about what is outside of the cave the others were very quick to determine that Boogie was
delusional and narcissistic. They determined that his personality was at fault and did not
see his restlessness as Boogie’s source of questioning; he was bored and hungry, and
wanted to see what was outside.

McCann, V.(2017) Human Relations: The Art Science of Building Effective Relationships
2nd Edition New York, NY: Pearson