Have I considered unlikely outcomes?

There’s a phrase: when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras. But in incident investigations it is often a zebra (or more likely, a herd of zebras) that led to the incident occurring. Don’t rule out the unlikely or unexpected.

Using this question as a fundamental Check Yourself can be beneficial – ‘consider the opposite’ is often used as a strategy to minimize bias. It makes you rethink the ideas you have and explore whether the alternative could be true. This provides a direct counter to confirmation bias, as well as potentially reducing the impact of anchoring, availability and representativeness biases by redirecting thinking in the opposite direction. If used as a matter of course in the investigative process this can be a useful tool to reduce bias.

Suggested actions:

For Interviewers

• Be sure you’re not just asking questions that follow the ‘usual’ routes as to why incidents occur.
• Be sure to listen to the information actually being shared, not what you think is being shared.
• Don’t be afraid to ask for clarifications and details about what happened if things aren’t clear – don’t leave assumptions unconfirmed.
• Actively consider the opposite – frequently ask yourself ‘what if the opposite were true?’ and see where your thinking and subsequent questioning takes you.

For Managers

• Be flexible in your resourcing and ensure enough headroom in scheduling to allow colleagues to spend time to consider the opposite during the investigative process.

Find out more about confirmation bias, anchoring bias, availability bias and representativeness bias here.