It is commonly understood that no one person has all the right ideas.

However, it is also very easy for most people to believe that they always have the best idea.

How do we overcome this paradox of thinking? According to Ray Dalio in his best-selling book, Principles, one aspect of the solution is practicing radical open-mindedness.

Why is this so important? His company, Bridgewater Associates, is famous for creating an idea meritocracy, designed to encourage the best ideas, not the most persuasive or good-enough ones, to rise to top. Radical open-mindedness is key to making this happen. According to Dalio:

Radical open-mindedness is motivated by the genuine worry that you might not be seeing your choice optimally. It is the ability to effectively explore different points of view and different possibilities without letting your ego or blind spots get in your way.

On pages 187-190 of Principles, Dalio proposes seven steps to keeping one’s mind open. They are listed below:

• Sincerely believe that you might not know the best possible path and recognize that your ability to deal with “not knowing” is more important that whatever it is you do know.
• Recognized that decision making is a two-step process: First take in all the relevant information, then decide.
• Don’t worry about looking good: worry about achieving your goal.
• Realize that you can’t put out without taking in.
• Recognize that to gain the perspective that comes from seeing things through another’s eyes, you must suspend judgement for a time – only by empathizing can you properly evaluate another point of view.
• Remember that you’re looking for the best answer, not simply the best answer that you can come up with yourself.
• Be clear on whether you are arguing or seeking to understand, and think about which is most appropriate based on your and other’s believability.

For the last point, Dalio explains the idea of believability:

I define believable people as those who have repeatedly and successfully accomplished the thing in question – who have a strong track record with a least three successes – and have great explanations for their approach when probed.

To dive deeper into these seven concepts, grab a copy of Principles and jump to pages 187-190.

There is a funny paradox at the heart of creativity. Most people would prefer not to receive criticism of their work; however, the only way to know if the work is effective is to get feedback. Therefore, the question is when is the best time to solicit evaluations of your work?

According to Tiago Forte, the best time to get feedback is early in the creative process. As he wrote in a recent newsletter:

The fundamental difficulty of creative work is that we lack objectivity when it comes to our creations.

That’s where feedback becomes invaluable—a borrowed pair of eyes from a novice’s perspective. It allows us to step outside our subjective viewpoint and identify what may be missing in our work.

However, there’s a common mistake I see people make when seeking feedback: they wait too long, often investing months of effort before unveiling their work.

The trap in waiting for feedback is that you could be well down a road that leads to a dead-end, which wastes time and energy. I know from personal experience the pain of this mistake on a writing project from a few years back. As Tiago writes:

Receiving feedback on a small aspect of your work at an early stage is less confronting, allowing you ample time to make corrections.

Each bit of intermediate feedback becomes a valuable tool for refining your creation—making it more focused, appealing, succinct, or easier to grasp.

Therefore, don’t be afraid to share your work as early and often as possible.

Learn more about Tiago by visiting Fortelabs.com.

Have you ever failed?

For most of us, failure is something we avoid at all costs. There is a stigma that those who fail seen as bad or incompetent. Yet the truth is that failure is a natural part of any learning process. To improve in an endeavor, we have to be willing to be wrong and learn from it.

The Big Think recently reposted an updated article that showed the paradox of failure through the lens of video games. Columnist Kevin Dickinson believes that video game players enter their games knowing they are going to lose, but that’s part of the fun. Why is this so? According to the article:

Failure feels awful, so people avoid it as often as they can. Even when we fail out of sight of others, our minds try to maintain our self-image by elaborating excuses for why the failure either wasn’t our fault or was completely unavoidable (i.e., motivated reasoning).

It’s interesting then that players seek out a pastime in which they are guaranteed to fail and willingly pay the price for that failure—whether it’s another quarter, lost time, or being forced to reassess one’s skills. In his short book The Art of Failure, Juul labels this phenomenon as the paradox of failure, the clash between a player’s desire to avoid failure and their drive to seek it out.

When failing a game’s challenge, Juul notes, a player discovers a deficiency in their ability or approach. Although having little importance outside the game, these deficiencies, like all inadequacies, are unpleasant to discover. Ironically, a player is never required to explore these personal inadequacies as they relate to a skill set they would never need had they not pressed start:

Before playing a game in the Portal series, we probably did not consider the possibility that we would have problems solving the warp-based spatial puzzles that the game is based on—we had never seen such puzzles before! This is what games do: they promise us that we can repair a personal inadequacy that they produce in us in the first place.

What drives players to keep playing even when they struggle? The trick may be in the thrill of discovery and the challenge needed to appreciate the victory.

One reason players crave failure is that success without that possibility is tasteless. “Failure,” states Julie Muncy at Wired, “offers texture, complexity, and a chance for growth on the part of the player and character alike.” Games that can beat you are worth engaging with.

Read the full article at the Big Think website.