If So, You Have a Lot of Company
A recent article (April 7, 2021) by G. S. Adams, et al., in the journal Nature, described experiments in which people were asked to solve various problems (such as visual diagrams) by either adding something or subtracting something. While the most economical solution in the problems given would have been to subtract something, the majority of subjects chose to solve the problems by adding something.
Adams, et al. speculate on the causes for this tendency:
- people are conditioned to solve problems by adding something
- they think they may get less credit for taking something away
- they think they may seem less creative for taking something away
- they assume that what is already there must exist for a good reason
- they are concerned about “sunk-cost bias” (the effort that it took to create something)
It is So Easy to Solve by Addition Rather than Subtraction
This tendency is seen in real-life situations. The authors give an example of a newly-installed university president who asked the community for suggestions to improve the functioning of the university. Only 11% of the suggestions involved removing something.
I am reminded of the time a friend of mine, a brilliant university professor, abruptly resigned from all of his committee assignments because he felt they were a waste of time. He was summoned by the university president to explain this action, and when he gave his reasons, he was promoted to provost!
When we have problems to solve, might we sometimes err in the direction of adding something when subtracting something would be a better solution? We may not even be aware that a given situation offers those alternatives.
Arranging a jazz piece for piano, I tried to fill in some empty spaces with more notes, thinking that otherwise it would sound too simple. My teacher told me to use less “filigree.”
People often try too hard to persuade someone that their opinion is the correct one, rather than saying less and letting that person mull it over.
In the medical workplace, the EMR (Electronic Medical Record) was meant to increase efficiency. Instead, additional personnel, scribes, are now necessary to complete the forms so that the doctors can concentrate on their patients. And what forms! No, my female patient doesn’t have prostate enlargement.
On a national level, I think of the expansion of regulations to the point of absurdity (at one point, we were instructed not to eat paint). And France, famed for its bureaucracy, requires people, during the current lock-down, to fill out a two-page form giving the reason why they need to go out.
But, as the architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe said, “Less is more.”
How Can One Solve a Problem Most Efficiently?
The most difficult part may be realizing that there is a choice (of addition or subtraction). But when you do have a problem, you can use my complimentary Tool to help. In Step 3, wish for a new mental pathway dedicated to addressing the problem and enabling you to become aware of the best solution. And remember: whenever you are in trance, all the pathways that you have wished for, past and present, will be activated to work on your behalf.
GET THE COMPLIMENTARY Tool
