Tag Archive for: perception

perceptual lensMost of us think that our beliefs are truth. But beliefs are not facts. Rather, they are a core part of
 our perceptual lens, and thus very powerful in shaping our everyday experiences.

Psychologists refer to this as a perceptual set – a predisposition to perceive things in a certain 
way, which leads us to notice only certain aspects of an object or situation while ignoring other
 details. I like to refer to these as perceptual lenses, because it’s literally the “lens” which you
 unconsciously and subconsciously perceive the world through that’s driving your behavior.

There are all kinds of perceptual lenses, and each of us tends to use, and overuse, our own few
 personal favorites. For example, when someone has a competitive lens, they will relate to almost
 any situation as though it is a competition, whether or not any such competition exists. Someone
 with a binary lens will relate to most situations as if there is only one right answer, and
 everything and everyone else is wrong.

Typically, we each have a few favorites that we apply no matter what the context. Because we
 are using these few lenses by default, they often are not appropriate to the context. We need to
 expand past our tired old playlist.

There are two kinds of lenses: generally helpful lenses, and those that are impeding when 
overused.

Generally helpful lenses:
  • Collaborative lens. The I-win-when-you-win-approach.
  • Optimistic lens. “Everything always works out for the best, even if it doesn’t seem so in the moment.”
  • Create possibility lens. It temporarily sets aside all perceived obstacles, problems, or doubts, in order to give you freedom to imagine an ideal.
  • Opportunity lens. With this lens, you ask yourself, “How can I find an opportunity in whatever situation I face?”
Impeding lenses:
  • “Problems to fix” or “what’s wrong” lens. With this lens, someone is always looking
 for something to go wrong; they are always wondering what can go wrong here, what
 will go wrong here?
  • Victim lens. “It doesn’t matter anyway.” “I can’t make a difference.” “Bad things always happen to me.”
  • Distrust/“It’s not safe” lens. A person with this lens operates from a default position that the world around them is inherently dangerous.
  • Binary/“black or white” lens. With this lens, a person tends to view situations as “either/or.” There’s no gray area, there’s no middle ground.

Each of these lenses has its own set of underlying beliefs and assumptions. You see what your
 lens shows you.

If you habitually default to the same lens all of the time, in every situation, then you are not 
perceiving the actual circumstances and environment around you. You are seeing only what your
 lens shows you. You are making assumptions instead of gleaning useful data that would more
 constructively guide your choices and actions.

You can’t be human and be without any lenses, but you can be aware of your lens, as well as be 
intentional about choosing an appropriate lens for any given situation. There is a place for a 
competitive lens and a collaborative lens, for a problems lens and an opportunity lens, and so on.
 What does not serve us is to blindly and automatically apply one lens across the board no matter
 what is actually happening.

Road Bump To Choosing A New Lens: You’re Attached To Your Story

You can’t change your lens while wearing your current lens. The people who have the hardest
 time transforming their leadership, or their lives, are those who hold onto their own story very,
 very tightly. Their self-image is dependent upon them being “the one who always_________.”
 The one who’s always right. The one who never gets what they want. The one who always 
achieves. The one who always cleans up after others. The one who’s the smartest. The one who 
is always betrayed. When you are so locked into your story, then a change of perceptual lens can 
feel destabilizing. If you aren’t the one who always is this or that, or who does this or that, then 
who are you?

When you step into the unfamiliar territory of using a new lens, you need to be willing to “try” it 
out. On some level you will feel some relief—because you are choosing a lens that empowers
 you— but on another level you are likely to resist the feeling of change.

Recognize your discomfort for what it is: your ego’s inner defenses against change. The 
solution? Acknowledge that discomfort while trying on the new lens— even though it feels odd,
 contradictory, or just plain impossible. You keep doing that again and again until the new lens 
can start to stay in place, and the new lens becomes the new you.

Initially, you aren’t going to have “proof ” that any of these helpful lenses will bring you better 
results than your current, impeding lens. You can only give them a try. Be curious, open,
 experimental. Lean into it. Doing so increases your options. And pay attention to what happens; 
observe your new results. Loosen up on your own story until you really get that your story is not
 you. That’s the only way that true change can happen.

By: Jody Michael is the author of Leading Lightly: Lower Your Stress, Think with Clarity, and Lead with Ease (Greenleaf Book Group Press, 2022). She is CEO of Jody Michael Associates, a coaching company specializing in executive coaching, leadership development, and career coaching. She is recognized as one of the top 4% of coaches worldwide and is an internationally credentialed Master Certified Coach, Board Certified Coach, University of Chicago trained psychotherapist, and Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

Mary MathesonWe interviewed Mary Matheson, an award-winning British director known for directing character-driven films in innovative ways for social impact. She was recently the lead director of the 10-part 360° New Realities VR Series 10 Young Women 10 Countries. One World, which showcases the stories of 10 young female activists across the world with focus on themes of education and fair access to technology, created for the Meta Quest 2 virtual reality headset.

Matheson is currently directing a multi-platform documentary about the women behind NASA’s Artemis women-led mission to the Moon. Matheson mixes the latest technology (mobile, augmented and virtual reality) with intimate documentary techniques to bring the audience into the heart of the narrative. We spoke to her about creating impact, both through her work and in this new industry.

Q: Tell us about what has driven your career long passion for making films of social impact, especially related to women.

I started out as a journalist cutting my teeth in Latin America (in Venezuela and Colombia) when I was 23 years old, reporting on the Guerrilla War and drug cartels. My passion has always been to communicate between two different people – between characters and the audience. I’ve specialized in foreign stories, often in conflict or post-conflict zones, but what’s interested me most is the stories we don’t hear.

Even if you think about Ukraine, social media has enabled us to hear stories that we wouldn’t normally have heard through mainstream media. When I started out, those things didn’t exist. I was always more interested in what we weren’t hearing and weren’t seeing, and being able to communicate that. So leaving behind straightforward journalism, I began to focus on communication with a purpose and greater objective: communicating what life was like for the people that we often see or hear about from one particular point of view, and I’ve always been interested in sharing the other point of view.

Q: How has Virtual Reality (VR) created the platform of ‘immersive storytelling’?

Immersive storytelling is literally being able to step into the story. Instead of peering through the window into another person’s world, you open the door and step inside.

Virtual reality became another tool for me to use to communicate with audiences and try to convey another person’s experience, so they can understand what it’s like in a country they wouldn’t normally visit. What has been incredible about VR is that it suddenly opens this extraordinary door to a whole world that you can feel you’re part of, rather than just viewing.

For me, that was transformational in terms of both my work and the characters themselves being able to communicate with you, the audience, directly. In a way, as a director, I stopped being the interpreter of the story and became the facilitator between two people.

The 10 Young Women series is a 360° film series- it’s shot like a film and looks incredibly real. You feel like you’re immersed in their world, because you’ve got the Quest 2 headset on and the audio is also 360 degrees, so you’re cut off from your real world environment. Your body and your mind suspend belief, and you feel like you’re in the country with the girl you are visiting. She talks to you directly, usually looking right at you, so you feel like you’re a good friend of hers – and she’s just telling you her story.

In India, due to the timing with Covid, we ended up sending the camera to the young woman herself, taught her how to use it, and she shot the film herself. That episode has an extraordinary authenticity, like a video diary shot brilliantly from her perspective.

Q: How were you impacted by working on the 10 Young Women series?

I now try to involve and co-create the characters in the filmmaking as much as possible, giving them power in the narration of what goes in and what doesn’t. I talk to them about what they would like to do, and it means you get these extraordinary authentic moments you would never expect, and little snapshots of their lives that you wouldn’t normally get if I was imposing my ideas. It’s revolutionized my job. Even as somebody who’s traveled a lot, I’m constantly surprised by reality and the true story.

For example, I was in Germany filming with a young Syrian woman who faces a lot of racism in Germany. I had the idea to have her sitting static and have people walking all around her and use the sound to hear all the words that she hears, hear the racism she faces and feel how she feels. She was absolutely furious with me and said, why should I have to go through this again? She wanted to do it differently. She wanted a very strong image of herself (which ended up being on a bike cycling) and to talk about how supported she felt by her mom, her sister and her aunts. Her idea was to use the ululation singing of her aunts in Syria around her, and it’s such an extraordinary moment in the film.

The technology and this industry is at such a wonderful, innovative and creative place. We all know how to shoot a sequence in a film smoothly and the techniques to use to create a certain feeling, whereas with virtual reality, we’re at the dawn. Even though I’ve done a lot of 360° filmmaking now, I’m still trying out new techniques every single time. So it’s really liberating and very experimental and invites co-creation.

Q: Tara Brach, Ph.D, talks about creating ‘unreal others’ – how when distanced from someone, we project into their world, making them unreal. The more distant a group, the easier it is to do that. What role do you think immersive storytelling plays in making others ‘real’ and creating empathy and compassion?

Even from the beginning of my work, I was really committed to trying to reduce “othering” and for me, this is just such a powerful tool that’s indescribable until you get in there. Once you do, you suddenly feel that you’re there and it does take you to a different level of empathy.

We talk about something called presence, which is like where you feel present in a different place, and the goal for me as a Creator is to make you feel present in that world. That’s what creates the feeling of empathy, or perhaps a different feeling, but it’s strong because you feel that you’re present. There’s examples where the headset technology has even been used to help people with trauma, to help opposing sides come towards agreement through empathy, and in peace building.

Q: How has virtual reality impacted upon and changed your creative process and sensory awareness, as a director and a creator?

Suddenly I have a toolkit at my fingertips that is extraordinary and has multiplied. I am now using techniques from theater and from gaming. I’m 53 years old and I’m not a gamer or technical person – but I’m using gaming techniques all the time now. It’s just blown my mind. I’m learning and using new skills with every experience.

For example, sound is transformational. Because as a director in VR, I can make a sound behind you and you’ll turn and look behind you. So, now you can use sound as a tool to direct your viewer’s gaze.

I have had to also learn about techniques from working with immersive theater – how to draw an audience in and do blocking, a technique that you use in theater and fictional filmmaking, not in documentary. In virtual reality we talk about creating a world you’re setting up for somebody to step into, not necessarily a scene as in film, and I’ve learned about that from working with immersive theater groups.

Q: What would be an example of a gaming technique you find compelling?

I never realized gaming is so extraordinary in the sophistication of their storytelling. It’s complex and layered. Branching narrative is a classic gaming technique I’m using.

For example, I’m working on a project on NASA, about the new Artemis mission, which will put a woman on the moon for the first time in 2024. There’s a main storyline, but you’ll also be able to go off and discover more about the astronauts if you want to dig deeper into their narratives, and then come back to the main storyline.

But there are also other ways of using branch narrative where you take a choice, go down a storyline, and don’t necessarily come back to the same ending.

For example, female director Gaëlle Mourre created this experience called Mechanical Souls, examining the difference between humans and avatars. As the viewer, you didn’t know you were making a choice, but your choices were made by where you looked in the scene. If you looked in a particular direction and were more interested, then the storyline would go along in that direction. Whereas, if you were looking over here at this person, then you’d start to follow a different storyline. At the end of that experience, everybody took off their headsets, started talking and realized they’d had different experiences based on where they’d put their attention.

Another experience I had was in Northern Iraq, where I was creating an experience about the Yazidi people, who were attacked by ISIS in 2014 and lot of the women were taken as sex slaves. The way I branched the narrative was that, as the viewer, you could choose whose perspective you wanted to hear about – whether from the young woman who had been taken as a slave, from her brother who had survived an attack or from the perspective of an ISIS fighter. These were all documentary interviews, but you as the viewer can choose whose perspective you want to listen to about a particular moment in time. And you could go back and listen to all of them, too. That’s not how I would structure a story if I was making a regular film – it would have incorporated the different viewpoints or come from one particular viewpoint.

Q: What further creative possibilities are you excited about in this industry?

I’ve just taken up a job as Professor of Practice for Arizona State University’s new center for Narrative and Emerging Media in Los Angeles. What I find really exciting is helping other people to learn about this technology and making sure they understand what they can do. I’ve had students build completely different immersive experiences. It builds on my knowledge, and then I say see what you can do and they go off and do something extraordinary.

I love film, so I personally get really excited about photo-real stuff. Animation and CGI are dominating the space, but photoreal is getting there, little by little. It’s not going to be long before you can have holograms in VR that will be live – you’ll be able to talk to somebody in Kurdistan or Northern Iraq, in photo-real 3D embodiment.

Another passion of mine is getting this technology out to the underrepresented voices. It’s about making sure that those people have access to the technology and there are no obstacles in the way. That’s often what the problem is – not that people don’t want to or don’t know how to do it – but that they’re blocked. We just need to make sure the obstacles aren’t there. Maybe not everyone can afford a headset, but we can make them available, such as in libraries or community centers, so there’s not a block to entry. We’re in the middle of working that out at a grassroots level in LA.

Q: What are the opportunities to create more equitability of voices in this industry?

We’re right at the start, it’s a whole new medium, and we can set the new rules. For example, I’m passionate that this is not for young people, but everybody. Why shouldn’t women in their fifties do this? There’s a lot of cultural prejudice against middle-aged women, that we won’t be able to keep up with technology. There is a myth around VR being techy or gaming, that it isn’t our world, but actually why shouldn’t it be? We can simply use it for what we want it to be.

In terms of diversity, equity and inclusion, what’s really interesting for me is who’s creating and distributing these narratives? How do we, early on in this game, meaningfully create an industry that is equitable? How do we really change the structure so it becomes an industry that has proper representation? It’s still white and male, and there’s yet also a strong female directing presence. But where the money goes is the big thing. When it comes to venture capitalists and female run businesses, that’s where we’ve got to really put in a lot of work – both bottom-up and top-down.

From the bottom up, that means looking at the big companies – who they’re hiring, who they’re giving internships to. Looking at people’s potential as opposed to necessarily their qualifications is a really interesting and different way of hiring people, not necessarily through traditional routes. It also means making sure funding, not only venture capitalists, but other types of funding both within business and also foundations, goes towards women, BIPOC communities and other marginalized voices.

We have an opportunity now to ensure that it’s really a representative industry that is being created and built in a way that reflects society, so it’s not one singular point of view that we’re seeing. That’s what I’ve always been excited to be a part of, and the possibility I see here, too.

Interviewed by Aimee Hansen

Professional Women

Guest Contributed by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic

Even when our assessment of other people’s competence is wrong, their self-confidence can still have self-fulfilling effects, opening doors and opportunities to those who simply seem more confident.

This is one of the reasons that so many well-intentioned people have advised women to be more confident to get ahead at work and in their careers. There are several problems with this kind of advice.

First, it fails to recognize that confidence has two sides. Although confidence is an internal belief, it also has an external side, which concerns how assertive you seem in the eyes of others. This external side of confidence is the most consequential because it is often mistaken for real competence.

The bottom line: regardless of how confident we feel internally, when we come across as confident to others, they will often assume that we are competent, at least until we prove them wrong.

This link between perceived confidence and competence is important. Although women are assumed to be less confident than men and some studies have shown that women appear to be less confident, a closer look at the research shows that women are internally confident. In fact, men and women are both overconfident—even if men are still more overconfident than women.
As Harvard Business School’s Robin Ely and Georgetown’s Catherine Tinsley write in the Harvard Business Review, the idea that women lack confidence is a “fallacy”:

That assertion is commonly invoked to explain why women speak up less in meetings and do not put themselves forward for promotions unless they are 100% certain they meet all the job requirements. But research does not corroborate the idea that women are less confident than men. Analyzing more than 200 studies, Kristen Kling and colleagues concluded that the only noticeable differences occurred during adolescence; starting at age 23, differences become negligible.

A team of European academics studied hundreds of engineers and replicated Kling’s finding, reporting that women do feel confident in general.21 But the researchers also noted that women’s confidence wasn’t always recognized by others. Although both women and men reported feeling confident, men were much more likely to be rated by other people as appearing confident. Women’s self-reports of confidence had no correlation with how others saw their confidence.

To make matters worse, for the female engineers, appearing confident had no leadership benefits at all. For the men, seeming confident translated into having influence, but for women, appearing confident did not have the same effect. To have any impact in the organization, the women had to be seen as confident, competent, and caring; all three traits were inseparable. For men, confidence alone translated into greater organizational clout, whereas a caring attitude had no effect on people’s perception of leadership potential.

We are, it seems, less likely to tolerate high confidence in women than we are in men. This bias creates a lose-lose situation for women. Since women are seen as less confident than men and since we see confidence as pivotal to leadership, we demand extra displays of confidence in women to consider them worthy of leadership positions. However, when a woman does seem as confident as, or more confident than, men, we are put off by her because high confidence does not fit our gender stereotypes.

If women don’t lack confidence, then why do we see differences in how men and women behave? Why are women less likely to apply to jobs or to request a promotion unless they’re 100 percent qualified? Why else would women speak less in meetings and be more likely to hedge their bets when making recommendations?

If the answer is not how women feel internally, it must be how they are perceived externally. In other words, differences in behavior arise not because of differences in how men and women are, but in how men and women are treated. This is what the evidence shows: women are less likely to get useful feedback, their mistakes are judged more harshly and remembered longer, their behavior is scrutinized more carefully, and their colleagues are less likely to share vital information with them. When women speak, they’re more likely to be interrupted or ignored.

In this context, it makes sense that even an extremely confident women would behave differently from a man. As Ely and Tinsley observed at a biotech company, the female research scientists were far less likely to speak up in meetings, even though in one-on-one interactions, they shared a lot of useful information. Leaders attributed this difference to a lack of confidence: “What these leaders had failed to see was that when women did speak in meetings, their ideas tended to be either ignored until a man restated them or shot down quickly if they contained even the slightest flaw. In contrast, when men’s ideas were flawed, the meritorious elements were salvaged. Women therefore felt they needed to be 110 percent sure of their ideas before they would venture to share them. In a context in which being smart was the coin of the realm, it seemed better to remain silent than to have one’s ideas repeatedly dismissed.” Thus, because we choose leaders by how confident they appear rather than by how confident or competent they are, we not only end up choosing more men to lead us but ultimately choose more-incompetent men.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is the Chief Talent Scientist at ManpowerGroup, a professor of business psychology at University College London and at Columbia University, and an associate at Harvard’s Entrepreneurial Finance Lab. He has published nine books and over 130 scientific papers. His most recent book is Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders? (And How to Fix It)?

This article is adapted by permission of Harvard Business Review Press. Excerpted from Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders? (And How to Fix It)? by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic Copyright 2019 Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. All rights reserved.

The opinions and views expressed by guest contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of theglasshammer.com