Running head: MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION; 1

Mental Models: Towers of Perception

OGL 220
Writing Assignment 2
Lindsay Snowden
April 11, 2017
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 2

Mental models: towers of perception

Prompt #1 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?
Describe the comment/situation clearly.
Recently I had a conversation with my sister about a party we attended together. At the

party, my family had the opportunity to meet some of my friends. During the conversation, my

sister mentioned my friend Amy. She asked what my relationship was like with her, because it

seemed like we had a lot in common. “Amy and I’s relationship is funny,” I told her. “I have a

hard time communicating with her or being able to read how she will respond in a certain

conversation because she takes a lot of things personally and ends up getting offended.” My

sister’s response was, “Oh, and you are nothing like that!” I paused the conversation and glared

at her. In that short moment, I pondered whether or not I should defend myself and try to explain

how I’ve grown and am different, or if I should dismiss the battle I presumed I would not win

anyway. In the end, I dismissed it and carried on with the conversation.

My older sister has a fierce assumption of who she thinks I am. The Primacy Effect,

when “people pay more attention to the first information they receive about a person or situation

than they do later information (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986)” (Hamilton, 2016, p. 119), has a strict

hold on her view of me which I am unsure if I can change by action or by word. While I believe

this to be an inaccurate trait to describe me presently, I fully acknowledge I used to take things

personally and become defensive. However, after years of personal development and my

willingness to be able to admit my faults and address them, this is not an issue for me so much

anymore. I would say regardless of this change in myself, my sister’s confirmation bias towards

me, or her “tendency to seek out and pay attention to information that supports what she already
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 3

believes, and simultaneously to ignore or reject contradictory information” (Hamilton, 2016, p.

121), prevents her from being able to see me any other way.

Prompt #2 B: 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.

When Shift Supervisors at my workplace used to gush about their love for our

company, or when they would enforce rules or standards which seemed to only benefit the

“higher-ups”, when they seemed to care a little too much about working at a coffee shop, I

used to scoff. They were “drinking the corporate juice”, as one of my friends used to say. As a

barista, the lowest on the totem pole in Starbucks retail, my mental model was that being

anything more than a barista was just playing into the hands of the corporate vampires. This

mental model significantly limited my range of behaviors (Hutchens, 1999, 65). For three

years I had no desire to promote within the company, I did not connect with their mission or

values, and working at Starbucks was just a paycheck. However, once I quit my second (and

primary) job and began to focus more on my quality of work at Starbucks, something changed

for me. Eventually, I decided I wanted to promote. During this process my attitude towards

Starbucks and my mental model completely changed. I began to see the inner workings of our

store and realized how important team effort was. I began to see the importance of inspiring

our team to provide excellent customer service not because we work in retail and it is our job,

but because we have the ability to positively impact people “one person, one cup, one

neighborhood at a time” (Starbucks, 2017). In his book, Leadership: A Communication

Perspective, Michael Hackman mentions that a group of people become a team when they

work together towards a common purpose to produce results collectively (2013, p. 217).

Changing my mental model and the way I view my work at Starbucks has enabled me to
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 4

excel as a leader, inspiring and motivating my team to work together, connect with others and

meet goals.

Prompt #3 A: Think of a time when someone presented his or her mental model as if it were a
fact. What kinds of responses did this elicit? Can you think of a time when you have done this?
Clearly and succinctly describe this, connecting to the readings.

Recently, my husband and I invested in a private dog trainer. Our trainer has over

eighteen years of experience and is very certain her “mental models” are the one and only

correct “mental models”. Between the few interactions I have had with our trainer it is clear

her mental model, or her view/beliefs of the world (Hutchens, 1999, p. 61), are heavily

influenced by her religion. For example, she mentioned to me she will never recommend

shopping at PetCo because “PetCo boycotted Israel and I am Jewish”. She also made a

comment to us that pork is bad for dogs. She mentioned this shortly after suggesting we use

all-beef kosher hot dogs for dog training treats. Because my husband did some independent

research and said he could not find information stating pork is bad for dogs, this caused us to

question how heavily her mental model influences the “facts” she shares with us.

Additionally, she applies her mental model as an animal lover. She told us to “forget what

you’ve ever heard about dogs being stubborn. Dogs do not know how to be stubborn”. While

I disagree with her, I realize her experience and beliefs, or mental model (Hutchens, 1999, p.

61), as an animal lover has shaped the way she views and understands animals. Though we

try to keep an open mind, my husband and I also approach her strict mental models with

skepticism.

I have applied my own mental models in several different situations. One that sticks

out to me is when I belonged to a non-denominational church. Most of my views/beliefs of

the world were shaped by this church which I belonged to for twenty-two years. I believed it
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 5

was wrong to wear jewelry, or makeup, or pants, or to cut your hair, or to swear, or to eat

without praying, or to skip church. Applying this mental model in my life made me a very

judgmental person; I measured people according to my religious beliefs. Thankfully, I am

now free of this mental model since I’ve stopped attending this church about eight years ago.

Prompt #4: 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.

One of the towers I inhabit is the belief that creative opportunities are vital to early

learning in childhood. From this tower I see there is limited creative curriculum in some

childcare settings, and in formal education setting there is too much emphasis on traditional

subjects. Another tower I inhabit is one where I see the world in need of more kindness.

Looking out from this tower I see we live in a world where it’s mostly “every man for

himself”. I see a need for more consideration of others and less judgement. There is a need for

less competition and more understanding. Yet another tower I live in allows me to see

differences as a benefit and not a detriment. From this tower I see the need to value each other

despite differences; to empower one another through our uniqueness. I see the need for

harmony and acceptance from this tower as well.

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 views have caused me to move through life with the intent of helping

others and to perceive differences as strengths rather than weaknesses. My towers have been

built upon the understanding that everyone sees the world differently, and because of this my

attitude and behaviors towards people are those of acceptance and patience. As I’ve

previously mentioned, my tower views were very restricted in the past when I was part of a
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 6

non-denominational church; I was less accepting of others. The world I lived in was very

small, judgmental, and closed-minded. One mental model I possess that clashes with others is

my belief that the homeless people on the streets take advantage of kindness. For this reason

I’d rather contribute to in other ways such as donating time or supplies to a shelter. Many

people do not agree with this mental model, as I have found over the years.

Prompt #5: 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?

Hutchens describes this “self-reinforcing dynamic” in a way that is much like

Hamiltons explanation of the confirmation bias: “our tendency to seek out and pay attention

to information that supports what we already believe” (2016, p. 121). If we continuously

apply the fundamental attribution error, assuming people’s behavior is due to their personality

rather than a situation (Hamilton, 2016, p. 124), to certain types of individuals or groups of

individuals, we prevent ourselves from broadening our mental models and enabling ourselves

to see things from another perspective. Collecting information which only supports our

beliefs, and refusing to acknowledge information which disproves them is the reason inter-

racial, inter-generational and other generalized group mental models still exist.

Prompt #6: Be sure to answer all the prompts. First, identify the organization you are
choosing for this assignment then write up a response to the following: Starbucks
1. What are some mental models that your organization may hold about its role
in the world?
One of the primary mental models Starbucks holds is there is a need for

positive social impact in the world. They also believe products should be sourced

ethically, and that there is a need to minimize our environmental footprint.

Another mental model Starbucks holds about the world is the need for inclusive

society and to create a positive change in the world.

MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 7

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

These mental models surface for Starbucks not only at a corporate level, but all

the way down to the retail level as well. To promote a positive global impact,

Starbucks encourages its employees to participate in community service projects.

Starbucks also believes nurturing and inspiring the human spirit through human

connection in a retail setting has a positive social impact as well (Starbucks, 2017).

Because they believe there is a need to reduce our environmental footprint

(Starbucks, 2017), Starbucks engages in actions such as recycling, “helping farmers

mitigate the impact of climate change on their farms” (Starbucks 2017), and

“conserving the energy and water [they] use, and purchase renewable energy credits”

(Starbucks, 2017).

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

A recent challenge Starbucks faced was backlash about hiring 10,000

refugees at their company by 2022. This decision was based on the mental model

that Starbucks should contribute to a positive global impact. An article posted on

February 2, 2017 online in the Seattle Times remarked, “The announcement was

greeted with cheers by some — and calls for a boycott by others, who said

Starbucks should focus on hiring Americans” (Tu, 2017). As a result of this

decision, some could say Starbucks overlooked the mental model that hiring U.S.

citizens should take priority over a global impact. However, what many actually

overlooked is this fact: “Starbucks has [already] hired 8,800 U.S. veterans and
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 8

military spouses already as part of its pledge, in 2013, to hire 10,000 total by 2018”

(Tu, 2017).

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.

Part of Starbucks global success can be attributed to the fact that they care about

their global impact. On their website, they state “from our beginnings as a single store

over forty years ago, in every place that we’ve been, and every place that we touch,

we've tried to make it a little better than we found it” (Starbucks, 2017). Because they

create a human connection that draws people to their company, they have been able to

continue to grow. Because they have been able to continue to grow, their global impact

has been able to become bigger, broader and more substantial, and the more substantial

their positive impact, the more people will want to support them. As a result of this

cycle, their self-fulfilling prophecy will continue to propagate.

5. Review the material on the Ladder of Inference (page 72 from the Neanderthal Debrief
document in the Readings content area of Module 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.
For the past two Christmas’ I have requested to be a part of the set-up for the

Christmas promotion in our store. It is an overnight event where six employees from

our store set out new signage, products and decorations to promote the holiday season.

This year after asking making several requests, several months in advance, without a

response from my manager, I assumed she did not like me enough to have me
MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 9

participate in the overnight event. Below is the breakdown of this event according to

the Ladder of Inference:

1. Select data from the pool: My manager ignored my request to participate in setting
up the holiday promotion.
2. Apply meaning to data: My manager only chooses her favorite people to
participate in the set-up.
3. Make assumptions based on meaning: Because she chose people she “likes” and
she did not choose me, she must not like me.
4. Draw conclusion from assumption: Because she doesn’t like me, she will not give
me responsibilities in the store.
5. Adopt beliefs: I must not be good at my job
6. Take action: I stopped asking for small responsibilities in the store.
7. Get results based on action: My manager thinks I am not interested in contributing
to the team, so she stops giving me responsibilities.

6. Review the guidelines for making your thinking explicit (see bullet points on pages 75
– 77 from the Neanderthal Debrief document in the Readings content area of Module
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.

Hutchens suggests asking clarifying questions and challenging our own thinking

in order to see outside of our own mental models (1999, p. 74). One method he

suggests is to “assume that your reasoning process has gaps or errors” (1999, p. 75). A

question I could ask to clarify gaps in my own thinking process is “is my perception of

how my manager feels about me just a projection of how I feel about myself?” Another

questioning method I could consider is if the steps in my thinking from the data I

collected which enabled me to reach a conclusion were accurate or not (Hutchens,

1999, p. 75). For example, I could tell my manager because she did not respond to my

requests to work on the holiday set, I assumed she did not believe in my ability to do a

good job. I could then ask her if this was a correct assumption, or if she had another

interpretation of this data (Hutchens, 1999, p. 76).

MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 10

Prompt #7: 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: The Primacy Effect proves “that people pay more attention to the first

information they receive about a person or situation than they do later information (Petty

and Cacioppo, 1986)” (Hamilton, 2016, p. 119). Though Boogie was able to think

outside of the Primacy Effect once he stepped outside of the cave, met Mike, and

learned the outside world is not as dangerous as he once though, his fellow cavemen

were not. They continued to remain in the cave as Boogie explored the outside world

because they refused to believe beyond the cave was anything but the edge of the

Universe (Hutchens, 1999).

2) False Consensus Bias: The False Consensus Bias “is our mistaken assumption that

others share our viewpoints, attitudes, and beliefs” (Hamilton, 2016, p. 122). While at

first it was true all of the cavemen shared the same belief system, that they shouldn’t

leave the cave or something treacherous might happen (Hutchens, 1999), Boogie’s

attitudes and beliefs started to change when he suggested “Boogie wonder what is

outside cave” (Hutchens, 1999, p. 12). The anger of his fellow cavemen was a result of

the false confirmation bias. Because they assumed all the cavemen shared the same

belief system, it was astounding to them one of their own might stray from those beliefs.

This False Consensus Bias prevented the cavemen from finding out how big the world

really was, lead them to cast out one of their own members, and may have possibly

prevented them from being receptive to Boogies return.

3) Confirmation Bias: The Confirmation Bias “is our tendency to seek out and pay

attention to information that supports what we already believe, and simultaneously to

MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 11

ignore or reject contradictory information” (Hamilton, 2016, p. 121). Boogie actually

engages in the opposite of the Confirmation Bias. He allows himself to learn new

information from “Mike”. He allowed the initial information he knew, that outside the

cave was dangerous and there was only life inside the cave (Hutchens, 1999), to be

replaced by new information, outside the cave was not dangerous and there were other

cavemen in other caves (Hutchens, 1999). His bias towards the outside world is then

changed.

4) Fundamental Attribution Error: The Fundamental Attribution Error “is our human

tendency to assume that other people’s behavior is due to something about their

personality, while at the time failing to consider possible situational influences”

(Hamilton, 2016, p. 124). Boogies fellow cavemen provide an excellent example of the

Fundamental Attribution Error when they begin to call him names after he declares his

intrigue for the outside world: “What if we not see what really is?” (Hutchens, 1999, p.

14). Rather than validating his observations about their situation, possibly there might

be more food or water or room outside of the cave (Hutchens, 1999, p. 13), they begin

to yell at boogie telling him he has “lost his mind”, he was “delusional and

narcissistic”, and how “Boogie want to ruin everything!” (Hutchens, 1999, p. 15).

These cavemen are a prime example of attributing a behavior to someone’s personality

rather than to the situation.

MENTAL MODELS: TOWERS OF PERCEPTION 12

References

Hackman, M., & Johnson, C. (2013). Leadership: a communication perspective. Long Grove, IL:

Waveland Press. ISBN-10: 1478602597

Hamilton, V.M. (2016). Human relations: The art and science of building effective relationships

(1st ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.

Hutchens, D. (2002). Shadows of the Neanderthal: illuminating the beliefs that limit our

organizations. Singapore: Cobee Publishing House.

Starbucks. (2017). Retrieved April 09, 2017, from https://www.starbucks.com/about-

us/company-information/mission-statement

Tu, J. I. (2017, February 02). Veterans at Starbucks respond to call for boycott over hiring

refugees. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/retail/veterans-at-starbucks-respond-to-call-for-

boycott-over-hiring-refugees/