Cognitive Biases in Coaching: The Impact Of Optimism Bias

*Originally posted on the FastModelSports.com Blog by Radius Athletics’ Randy Sherman.

Optimism Bias can lead to unrealistic expectations, disappointment and emotional turmoil for coaches who do not guard against it.

There are numerous cognitive biases – or mistakes in reasoning – humans are susceptible to. Coaches can and do fall prey to these biases as well. One such bias is the optimism bias and failure to guard against it can lead to unrealistic expectations and disappointment.

The optimism bias is defined as the difference between a person’s expectation and the outcome that follows (Sharot 2011). While coaches (and other leaders) may view themselves as rational and logical, there is research to suggest they are overly optimistic. All humans can fall prey to this. Ask a newlywed the percent chance their marriage will end in divorce and they will likely respond with “0%”  despite the fact that divorce rates are much higher.

Further, ask the same newlywed of the percent chance that a friend’s marriage will end in divorce and they will likely respond with a much higher estimation. We are better able to estimate the probable outcomes of others than our own probable outcomes.

A closer look at Optimism Bias

Take a look at the graphic below. Can you accurately categorize your team on this continuum? Seems easy enough as you, better than anyone, know what it does well and what it does not do well.

Optimism bias would suggest that you cannot. Being passionate about a team (your own) can make you think that team will be more successful than they can reasonably expect to be. Optimism bias would also suggest you are much better able to place a rival team or a team from your conference in the correct category than your own. So why the disconnect?

In her book The Optimism Bias: A Tour of the Irrationally Positive Brain, cognitive neuroscientist Tali Sharot offers an explanation. We experience the optimism bias more when we think the events are under our direct control and influence. In other words, we believe we have the unique skills and ability to change the outcome. Examples: I will not get a divorce, because I am a good husband/wife; I will not have a wreck, because I am a good driver; I will not have a bad team because I am a good coach. There is an illusion of invulnerability which can lead to disappointment.

It is easy to see how optimism bias can lead a coach to have unrealistic expectations. If your perception of your program is off by a category (or more) you will be in turmoil when your team performs to what may be its actual ability. Your optimism led to anguish when a more realistic expectation would have led to a degree of satisfaction.

Without a sudden infusion of talent, even the best coach will have a hard time getting his or her team to rise more than one of the above categories in a given season. If your team is average you will not “coach” your way to elite in a season. Without the sudden infusion of better quality talent, coaches should not expect to skip steps on this continuum. The climb up this continuum is often gradual.

How else Optimism Bias shows up

Optimism bias can be reflected in tactical decisions as well. An offense that does not build in safeguards is not accounting for the fact that their opponent will disrupt it. Practicing in perfect world conditions reflects an unwarranted optimism that perfect world conditions will exist in competition. They won’t. It is better to prepare your team for the inevitable chaos than to cling to the optimistic belief that things will go perfect.

In his book Black Box Thinking author Matthew Syed offers a helpful exercise that could guard against optimism bias – the pre-mortem. A post-mortem is looking back at possible causes for an unfavorable outcome after the fact. What went wrong? How can we prevent it from happening again?

A pre-mortem is different and takes some imagination. Let’s say you and your staff were considering a shift in defensive playing style and you are excited about all the positives this shift could bring. You decide just before practices begin that you are going to implement this defensive change. Do a pre-mortem. Gather your staff and imagine that the season is over and this defensive idea was an abject failure. Why did it fail? How did teams attack this? List these things.

Imagine you are in a post-season meeting discussing how and why this defensive shift failed. The answers will make you aware of the tradeoffs of the shift and reveal the most important areas of emphasis to make it work. Don’t go into it assuming it will be great without considering the possibility it will not be.

Optimism bias can lead to short term thinking for the head coach in his/her first year in charge. First, it is much easier for the new coach to see the flaws in their predecessor than themselves. Again, optimism bias is strongest when we believe we have control.

Second, a high school coach taking over an underperforming varsity TEAM may optimistically believe they can win a bunch of games with some quick fixes and heavy-handed X’s and O’s. They fail to take a PROGRAM > TEAM approach. In essence they believe they can coach their varsity TEAM up more than one of these levels. The better usage of their time would have been to lay the foundation for their PROGRAM by installing a long-term system even though it may not have been the best thing for the varsity TEAM in the short term. No matter how hard you try, you will not win until you are good. Too many coaches are optimistic about their ability to guide their team to wins before they are good.

Be optimistic, but realistic

Optimism is not all bad. Without optimism entrepreneurs would not take risks and innovation would cease. Optimism motivates us to pursue goals. If we expect good things to happen we are more likely to be happy. Coaches should absolutely dream big about the heights their teams and programs can reach. But they should be more realistic (and less optimistic) about the timeline. Improvement without a sudden upgrade in talent takes time. Much like your friend who is always late because they are overly optimistic about traffic conditions, things tend to take more time than we estimate.

The purpose of this essay is not to be a downer. Sports offer a few examples of over-achievement for sure. The purpose of this essay is to help coaches steer clear of emotion turmoil. Stay out of your emotions and deal better with the realities of your coaching situation. Stay in the moment and resist the urge to skip steps in the process – something coaches always ask players to do.

Research has shown that optimism bias is difficult to avoid even when a mound of evidence is presented. Showing someone cancer rates does not cause them to adjust their estimation of the likelihood of getting cancer. As coaches we want to reflect belief to our players. It feels foreign to accept unfavorable outcomes and you should not stop seeking to improve. Dream big and aim high, but stay realistic about the time and investment it will take to get to your desired destination and set realistic goals along the way. Stay away from the emotional and hyperbolic roller coaster by detaching from optimism bias. Find a mentor or friend to self-scout your team. These are all action steps to help you avoid the impact of optimism bias.

Continue the conversation:

For unbiased help with practice planning and examination of your process please reach out and join the Radius Athletics community for basketball coaches!

Any questions, contact Randy! Sign up here for a twice-monthly newsletter for basketball coaches!

Cognitive Biases in Coaching: Identifying Survivorship Bias

*Originally posted on the FastModelSports.com Blog by Radius Athletics’ Randy Sherman.

Next in a series on Cognitive Biases and how they can impact our decision making as basketball coaches. Here’s how Survivorship Bias works.

Identifying Survivorship Bias in coaching

One of the common Cognitive Biases coaches display is the “Survivorship Bias.” An example of this bias is demonstrated in the tweet below.

First, Coach Miller is one of my favorite follows on Twitter and none of what is written here is meant to slight or insult his views. He shares great information that we all can benefit from.

His tweet is in reference to the University of Virginia Men’s Basketball team and their vaunted Pack Line defense. The tweet references information from Synergy Sports data where the Cavaliers lead the NCAA in defensive points per possession. As most NCAA Men’s Basketball fans know, UVA has been at or near the top of these metrics since the arrival of Head Coach Tony Bennett in Charlottesville.

Coach Miller’s tweet and the general perception that “if the best team does this so too should you” is an example of Survivorship Bias. Yes, Virginia employs the Pack Line defense. And yes, they lead the nation in defensive PPP. But what is the causation?

Survivorship Bias points out that we tend to focus on the “surviving” example of something and neglect other methods or other inferior examples.

• Is Virginia the only team that runs Pack Line defense?
• What of the dozens and dozens of NCAA teams that also run Pack Line defense but are not ranked number one?
• If Syracuse were leading the nation in the same category, should we all make the move to 2-3 Zone?
• Would Virginia still lead the nation in defense if they ran 1-3-1, a junk defense or pressure man-to-man?
• Is a team at or near the bottom of the defensive rankings also a Pack Line team?
• Does leading this category translate to winning more games or championships?

Misconceptions and blind spots

The Survivorship Bias misconception is that by focusing on the one surviving example, the most successful example, you too will be successful.

“Hey if the best defensive team does this, it must work, right?”

With a blind spot toward Survivorship Bias, all the other examples of teams that run Pack Line but not as well as UVA become invisible. Therefore the differences as to why Virginia’s Pack Line is superior to all the other Pack Line defenses in the NCAA becomes invisible as well.

Coping with Survivorship Bias

Coaches can guard against this bias by simply being aware it exists. Rare is the coach that does not second guess his/her methods and Survivorship Bias is a big culprit in the tendency to question oneself.

Coaches feel as if they are doing something different than what the best examples do, then they must be wrong. This can be true of any defense, offense, practice strategy or even more minor details (Kansas has assigned seating on the team bus, so it must be the way to go!).

We have all been guilty of Survivorship Bias – both expressing it and falling victim to it. Resisting the urge to compare is difficult even for the most successful coaches.

How have you fallen victim to Survivorship Bias?

How can awareness of this bias help you make better decisions as basketball coach?

Continue the conversation:

For unbiased help with practice planning and examination of your process please reach out and join the Radius Athletics community for basketball coaches!

Any questions, contact Randy! Sign up here for a twice-monthly newsletter for basketball coaches!

Cognitive Biases in Coaching: Avoiding Outcome Bias

*Originally posted on the FastModelSports.com Blog by Radius Athletics’ Randy Sherman.

Cognitive Bias In Coaching: Thoughts on avoiding the pitfalls of Outcome Bias for basketball coaches, teams and players. 

“But Coach, I made it…”

The above phrase is one that many coaches have heard before. The lessons of shot selection are often lost on players after a favorable outcome follows a subpar decision. This is one example of a common cognitive bias called Outcome Bias.

By definition, Outcome Bias is the tendency to judge a decision based on its eventual outcome instead of the quality of the decision at the time it was made. Here are two classic examples:

• Just because you experience a great windfall at a Las Vegas casino, does not mean gambling is a good monetary decision.
• A more extreme example: a drunk driver. When one leaves a bar after a night of drinking, he/she knows it is a bad decision to get behind the wheel. However, if they make it home and their drunk driving does not harm themselves or others, they’re more likely to do it again in the future.

In both scenarios, a favorable result followed a poor decision. In spite of the poor decision making, the gambler and the motorist found a favorable outcome.

Examples of Outcome Bias in basketball

It is easy to see how shot selection in basketball can fall prey to Outcome Bias. Even ill-advised shots sometimes find the bottom of the net and great shots are often missed. Players who have made ill-advised shots in the past do not see them as poor decisions because of the favorable outcomes they have experienced.

Coaches however, have a different motivation – efficiency. They want the most favorable shot for the team and often have to teach some hard lessons made harder by Outcome Bias inherent in players. Many coaches use a shot selection grading system where they grade the shot decision independent of outcome as a means of overcoming Outcome Bias. Shots are give a grade based on quality criteria. There is no “curve” added to the grade if the shot goes in.

Another way to evaluate shot selection is to note the “advantage state” of the offense relative to the defense when the shot is attempted. In the diagram below, the offense and the defense are in a neutral advantage state. The defense is organized and their matchups are set. The offensive players are all being guarded. Neither the offense nor the defense has an advantage at this point.

If Player 1 were to dribble in place or jab step a few times while doing nothing to disorganize the defense, then launch a contested shot, that would grade as a bad shot…even if it went in. Discourage shots against a neutral defense. Instead, seek “Big Advantage” shots as diagrammed in the example below.

A better shot can be found after employing elements to shift the defense. Ball screens, off-ball screens, handoffs and penetration actions will disorganize the defense to create advantages for the offense. In the above example, Player 1 uses penetration to collapse the defense thus creating a Big Advantage shot for the offense. Player 4 catches with space against a recovering defense. Accumulate as many Big Advantage shots as you can.

Granted, it is a luxury to have a player or players who can make tough shots for that is often what quality opponents force you to take. Guard against players unnecessarily taking Neutral Advantage shots as they decrease long-term efficiency of the offense.

A Big Advantage shot is good even if it misses and a Neutral Advantage shot is frowned upon, even if it goes in. Develop a “NATO” mindset where NATO means “Not Attached To Outcome.”

Coaches too are guilty

After a win in which a team surrendered 40 points, a coach may be quick to praise their defense. The outcome in terms of the final tally was favorable, but are you certain it was to the credit of your defense? Or did the opponent miss multiple Big Advantage shots? Perhaps it was your offense that “held” them to 40 points.

It is quite possible that the favorable outcome you perceived materialized in spite of bad defensive decisions. It is perilous to simply accept the favorable outcome without examining the decisions. Perhaps your decision to play a certain defense or employ a certain defensive concept was not the reason for the favorable outcome. You surrendered multiple Big Advantage shots to your opponent and they did not fall.

Are “we” winning or are “they” losing? And to what degree?

Are our favorable outcomes a byproduct of our successes or their mistakes? And to what degree?

Via Twitter or email, readers and coaches share with me plays that they are in love with. “We score on this one all the time!” is a phrase often repeated. When looking at a play or offense, a beneficial litmus test is whether or not the play or offense is dependent upon a defensive mistake.

Coaches may get a favorable outcome from a play, offense or set and be blind to its inadequacies. Maybe It “works” against inferior opponents or when the defense bungles an assignment leading the coach to believe it is of quality. Or it is quite possible that a successful offensive outcomes is the result of bad opponents. It may also be possible that your offense is bad but your players are good. This is dangerous because eventually you will likely meet a team with equal or superior talent.

Instead, ask yourself if the play, set or offense will “work” even if the defense does exactly what they’re coached to do. Design matters. And designing an offense based on reads and decisions takes into account your opponent doing exactly what they are coached to do and still being wrong. Good offense uses its opponents’ defensive concepts against them.

Analyze all decisions and outcomes

Humans are all guilty of cognitive biases such as Outcome Bias. Being aware of them is the first step to avoiding them and lessening their impact. While most organizations, teams and coaches are diligent about examining failures (unfavorable outcomes) they often accept favorable outcomes and move on.

Begin by separating decisions from outcomes and striving for the best decisions within your program. Take a “Devil’s Advocate” approach and look at your outcomes while seeking to poke holes in them. Make sure you are not blindly attributing favorable outcomes to your process.

Continue the conversation:

For unbiased help with practice planning and examination of your process please reach out and join the Radius Athletics community for basketball coaches!

Any questions, contact Randy! Sign up here for a twice-monthly newsletter for basketball coaches!

Cognitive Biases in Coaching: Defeating Choice-Supportive Bias

*Originally posted on the FastModelSports.com Blog by Radius Athletics’ Randy Sherman.

Coaches: Is Choice-Supportive Bias plaguing your ability to make good decisions and move on from bad ones? Here’s how to spot and defeat it.

As coaches, we have all made decisions that we have come to regret. During preseason planning you may be excited about an offense, defense or lineup you have selected. You spend early season practices preparing your team to carry out the strategies you chose.

Then the season commences and you put those decisions in the marketplace. You begin to receive feedback and the immediate results are… not good. What you do at this moment could be influenced by a cognitive bias called Choice-Supportive Bias.

Do you stick with the decision? How long? Do you defend the decision? How vigorously? Do you downplay how poor the decision is beginning to look? What is holding you back from admitting the decision was bad? These are the questions that go into defeating Choice-Supportive Bias.

Choice-Supportive Bias in coaching

Choice-Supportive Bias is the tendency for a decision-maker to defend his/her own decision or to later rate it better than it was simply because he/she made it. When coaches defend a decision in the face of rising evidence that the decision was bad, that is Choice-Supportive Bias. When coaches exaggerate how good a decision was or downplay how bad it was, that is Choice-Supportive Bias.

The crux of this cognitive bias is what inhibits us from moving on. Why do we stick to a strategy that is not working? Why do we continue to give minutes to a player(s) that is proving to be ineffective? As coaches, we often tie our self-esteem to our decision-making ability. When a decision goes bad, it feels like a reflection on our judgement and intelligence – and no one likes to have either of those questioned. Admitting you were wrong is hard.

In efficient organizations there is no room for this, however. Protecting the ego of the decision-maker takes away from progress. Strong organizations pivot away from bad decisions before weak ones do.

Other examples

We coach in an age where data and performance quality measures are easier to obtain than ever before. Your decision feedback is often immediate and empirical. If you feel a decision “wasn’t that bad” you have tools in place to put that assertion to the test.

A real world example: we have all experienced buyer’s remorse. Perhaps you purchase an automobile, home or an expensive item like a set of golf clubs. You later begin to feel that you were the victim of some slick salesmanship and a seed of doubt about the decision begins to grow. You may have made an impulse buy you regret. What do you do? Typically we begin to justify the decision. We do all sorts of mental gymnastics and come up with talking points that make our decision sound like it was perfect. Those purchases too are decisions and when our decisions are tied to our self-esteem, Choice-Supportive Bias helps us “make it right.”

Coaches must take this a step further. Self-scout your team to evaluate whether the decisions you have made which seem to be working out favorably actually are.

How to identify and defeat

Coaching staffs should look at positive results with a bit of skepticism. It is easy to take positive results at face value and move on. Is our compact zone defense “working?” Or is it working because our opponents cannot shoot? What will become of it when we face an opponent who can?

It takes a trained coaching eye to discern whether a coaching decision goes wrong as a result of lack of skill or if it went wrong because it was a bad strategy. When building a basketball program, there is a certain amount of insistence a coach must exhibit. At times, the coach must be the most stubborn person in the room.

You will not win until you are good – but when our skill is where it needs to be and our effort level is where it needs to be and the strategy still goes wrong, it’s time to question its viability.

If you have overly defended a past decision just to protect your self-esteem or to save face, that is Choice-Supportive Bias. If you have tried to boost your self-esteem by exaggerating the value of a past decision, you are not only guilty of revisionist history but also Choice-Supportive Bias. Someone on staff needs the professional freedom to tell the decision-maker they are not being objective and their tendency to cling to decision a bit too long is damaging the progress of the program.

Continue the conversation:

For unbiased help with practice planning and examination of your process please reach out and join the Radius Athletics community for basketball coaches!

Any questions, contact Randy! Sign up here for a twice-monthly newsletter for basketball coaches!