Volume C-1 | Judgment Standard Cards: Four Practical Tools

This is an English translation of 中文原文

Opening: Why Do Smart People Also Make Wrong Judgments?

Have you seen this scenario:

A very smart person, facing complex problems, speaks eloquently, logic clear, conclusion definite. But afterwards proves he was completely wrong.

Not because he wasn’t smart enough, but because his judgment lacked “standard cards.”

What are standard cards? Like quality inspection cards in factories, a set of judgment standards that can be reused. With these standards, you don’t have to think from scratch every time “is this reliable or not,” but compare against standards, check item by item.

This volume gives you four most practical standard cards.

Standard Card One | Three-Window Card: Look at Problems from Three Angles

Why Is One Angle Not Enough?

Imagine you’re buying a house.

• If you only look at the real estate agent’s introduction, you’ll think “this house is perfect.”
• If you only hear neighbors’ reviews, you’ll think “this community has many problems.”
• If you only look at the past year’s price trend, you might miss longer-term trends.

Which is the truth? All are, and none are. Because each angle is only part of the truth.

Three-Window Card Usage

Before making important judgments, ask yourself three questions:

1. Change source: Where does this information come from? Are there other sources’ statements? If there are contradictions between sources, where are the contradictions?
2. Change time: Is this phenomenon recent or long-existing? If you extend the time, will the conclusion change?
3. Change demographics: What do different groups (beneficiaries, losers, observers) think about this? Why are there differences?

If what the three angles see is roughly consistent, your judgment is relatively reliable. If there are large contradictions, it means this is more complex than you thought, be more cautious.

Example: Evaluating an Investment Opportunity

• Source window: What did the project party say, what did investors say, what did users say?
• Time window: The industry’s trend over the past three years, dynamics of recent three months, expectations for the next three years—how are they respectively?
• Demographics window: How do early users, competitors, industry experts respectively view it?

After looking through all three windows, you can piece together a relatively complete picture.

Standard Card Two | Three-Correction Card: Check for Structural Errors

Most Errors Are Structural

80% of the mistakes you make are not because you’re stupid, but because you fell into three structural traps:

1. Aliasing: Mixing information from different sources, different times, different natures together.
2. Insufficient correction: Using overly simple methods to handle complex problems, missing key corrections.
3. Tail neglect: Only looking at average cases, ignoring the impact of extreme cases.

These three traps account for the vast majority of daily decision-making errors.

Three-Correction Card Usage

Before making important decisions, check three problems:

1. Aliasing check: Have I conflated information from different sources? For example, treating “what others said” the same as “what I saw with my own eyes”? Mixing “three-year-old data” with “last week’s data” in analysis?

2. Correction check: Is my method too crude? For example, using simple average instead of weighted average? Using linear model to fit obviously nonlinear phenomena? Ignoring important moderating variables?

3. Tail check: Have I considered extreme cases? For example, if the worst case happens, can I bear it? If the best case happens, am I prepared?

Example: Making Team Plan

• Aliasing check: When estimating time, have I confused “time in smooth situations” with “average time”?
• Correction check: Have I considered team members’ capability differences, collaboration costs, unexpected delays?
• Tail check: If a key member suddenly leaves, can the plan continue? If progress is twice as fast as expected, can I handle it?

Through three corrections, you can significantly reduce the risk of “snap judgment” decisions.

Standard Card Three | Mirror-Test Card: Examine Fairness

What Is True Fairness?

There’s a simplest test method: If I swap positions with the other party, can I still accept this rule?

If the answer is “yes,” then this rule is fair. If the answer is “no,” then there’s a problem.

This is the “Mirror-Test Card”: what can be swapped in the mirror without distortion is called justice.

Mirror-Test Card Usage

When making rules, allocating resources, making evaluations, ask yourself:

1. Role swap: If I were the other party, how would I view this rule?
2. Group swap: If two groups swap positions, does the rule still hold?
3. Time swap: If this rule applies to myself, what would I think?

Example: Designing Assessment System

Suppose you’re the boss, designing employee assessment system.

• Role swap: If I were an employee, could I accept this assessment system? Are the standards clear? Is there room for “black box operations”?
• Group swap: Do employees from different departments (sales, technology, administration) all have reasonable promotion paths under this system?
• Time swap: If someday in the future, I also have to accept this assessment, would I still design it this way?

If the answers to all three questions are “yes,” then this system is relatively fair. If any answer is “no,” you need to reconsider.

Standard Card Four | Closed-Loop Card: Five-Minute Action Method

Why Are Many Plans Just “Armchair Strategies”?

Because most plans only have “goals” and “ideal states,” no “minimum executable units.”

What is a minimum executable unit? It’s: a specific action that can be completed within five minutes without additional decisions needed.

Closed-Loop Card Usage

Break any plan into “five-minute actions.”

For example, you want to “improve English proficiency,” this is not an executable action, because it’s too abstract.

Break it down into:

• Today’s five minutes: memorize ten words.
• Tomorrow’s five minutes: listen to an English podcast segment, note three words you don’t understand.
• Day after tomorrow’s five minutes: make sentences with these three words, send to language partner for correction.

Each action is specific, measurable, completable within five minutes.

Example: Starting a New Project

Don’t say “I want to make an APP,” but:

• First five minutes: write down the three core problems this APP should solve.
• Second five minutes: draw the simplest interface sketch.
• Third five minutes: find a friend, describe this idea, record their first reaction.

Each completed five-minute action moves you forward one step. One hundred five-minute actions is the embryonic form of a project.

Why Five Minutes?

Because five minutes is short enough that you can start anytime, no need to “wait for a complete time block.”

Meanwhile, five minutes is long enough to complete a meaningful small task.

More importantly, after completing a five-minute action, you get immediate feedback, this feedback propels you to the next five minutes.

Conclusion: Put Standard Cards in Your Toolbox

These four standard cards are your “quality inspection tools” when making judgments:

1. Three-Window Card: Change source, change time, change demographics, look at problems from three angles.
2. Three-Correction Card: Check aliasing, insufficient correction, tail neglect, avoid structural errors.
3. Mirror-Test Card: Role swap, group swap, time swap, examine fairness.
4. Closed-Loop Card: Break down into five-minute actions, make plans truly executable.

These standard cards are not profound theory, but the most fundamental practical tools.

Print them out, stick them on your desk, check against them before every important decision.

You’ll find many seemingly complex problems can actually be clarified with these simple standard cards.

And those truly complex problems also become clearer and more controllable with the help of these standard cards.