I remember the confidence of walking into the room already knowing what, and how we should build. I couldn't resist speaking first, sharing with everyone the direction we need to go. Isn't that what I was being paid for? Why waste time on meetings while the decision is obvious, at least for myself?
The behaviour appears to be rational when we consider the efficiency criteria. Coming prepared, sharing the experience, and following proven paths are all good practices. Choosing already known direction is a safe bet and might be perceived as an act of pragmatism. But is it really the optimal solution to the problem? Or more importantly, does it solve the right problem?
I've been noticing a similar pattern in the behaviour of other senior colleagues in multiple contexts. They set a tone for the whole conversation, and less experienced colleagues feel obligated to follow the direction. The more right they are, the less room there is to find out when they're not. Eventually, they end up solving the wrong problem. The one they already know how to solve.
This pattern has a name. The Einstellung effect has been studied for decades1, and my favourite illustration on this comes from chess. When there’s a familiar position on a board for a player, their attention is directed away from the better move towards the one they feel confident with. They’re convinced they considered alternative moves, but the eye-tracking machine doesn't register a player really has seen the move, they rather focus on what they’re used to seeing2.
