Learn to Think in Color

How Can You Use Consequences in Decision Making? Clarifying choices by thinking through the ripples, not just the splash. Big-picture framing Using  consequences in decision making  means looking beyond “What do I want?” and asking, “Then what… and then what?” Instead of judging options only by how they feel right now, you deliberately forecast the short-term and long-term outcomes each path is likely to create. This shift turns vague pros and cons into clearer stories about the future: who’s affected, what changes, and what risks you’re really accepting. By slowing down to imagine different consequence pathways—including ethical ones—you make more grounded, less reactive choices that are easier to defend to yourself and others later. Why consequences are your hidden dataset Every decision is a bet on the future, and consequences are the data you’re (often unconsciously) using to place that bet. Most people do this intuitively: you  feel  that one option is safer or ...

How does Institutional Memory act as a constraint on current Meaning-making? Why yesterday’s stories quietly limit tomorrow’s interpretations Big-picture framing Institutional memory is the shared store of stories, norms, and “how we do things here” that lives in an organization’s people, processes, and artifacts. It doesn’t just preserve the past; it shapes how people interpret the present. That means institutional memory can quietly constrain current meaning-making by narrowing which questions feel askable, which data seems credible, and which options feel “realistic.” In this piece, we’ll unpack how institutional memory guides sensemaking, when it becomes a trap, why the “five monkeys and a ladder” parable keeps getting retold, and how to work with memory deliberately rather than unconsciously. Institutional Memory as an Invisible Operating System Think of  institutional memory  as the operating system running in the background of a team or organization. You don’t see it di...

How Does the Mind See Games and Work Differently? Why your brain loves “play” and resists “work” — even when the task is the same Big picture framing Does the mind see games and work differently, or does it just react to how each is designed and framed? The same activity can feel like a grind in a task tracker and energizing in a game, even if the mental effort is identical. The difference often lies in meaning, autonomy, feedback, and stakes—not in the label “work” or “play.” Understanding how your brain responds to “game mode” versus “work mode” can help you redesign tasks and environments so effort feels more like play, without ignoring real constraints like deadlines, pay, and culture. The brain’s two stories: “I have to” vs “I get to” Your mind doesn’t file activities under “games” and “work.” It files them under stories: Am I choosing this or being forced? Does this matter to me? How risky is it to fail? Do I see progress when I try? Games usually hit the sweet spot: Voluntary: y...