Data and Decision Analytics

Journal

This paper analyzes Chapters 9 and 10 of the book Superforecasting by (Tetlock &
Gardner, 2015). The chapters are primarily about the working of forecasting teams, attitudes that
the best superforecasting teams adopt, behaviors that are dropped, and leadership. These chapters
changed my mind because I have always believed that group ideas are the best. However, I have
learned that groups are essential and groupthink is dangerous, but what makes them even more
effective is maintaining the attitude to question everything and giving time and effort to the
group to find a new information and develop new lines of thought. The 3 biggest takeaways from
this week’s readings are that superteams are better than individuals in superforecasting; teams
are essential in superforecasting. When individual brilliance, effort, and commitment to
superforecasting ideals come to play, leadership can be made better by following
superforecasting ideals.
The opponents of the groupthink theory argue that it is unlikely that individuals maintain
independence of thought and perspective in a group setting. This does not necessarily help
superforecasters because the loss of independence of judgment often leads to errors.
Superforecasters become adept in their job due to their ability to discuss their forecasts with
others. Groups can help superforecasters understand forecasts much better by comparing ideas.
Working in groups does not always mean that one has to subscribe to a unified line of thought
because forecasters can disagree without being disagreeable. Agreeing should not always mean
that someone is right. One of the key attributes of being superforecasters is having the ability to
question everything and not conform to the obvious line of thought. As such, for forecasters,
there is more work when working in a group rather than when working individually because
groups present individuals with opportunities to think about why their opponent could be wrong;

3
superforecasters should not always accept the line of thought that other forecasters subscribe to
no matter how good they are at it. With time, working with a team of equally motivated
individuals is one way to build a superteam.
The success of a superteam is built on avoiding groupthink and fostering cultures of
individuals who are willing to dig in to collect information they can use to challenge each other
respectfully. When presented with facts in a group, it is always wise to admit ignorance and
accept help (Tetlock & Gardner, 2015). Group interactions can be limited to 3 major
characteristics of individuals in group teams: givers, takers, and matchers. Givers are individuals
who contribute more than they receive in return. Takers receive more than they contribute, while
matchers receive and contribute in the same measure. Supergroups with many givers tend to
thrive because time, effort, and ideas are in constant supply. When a giver is in a group of many
givers, they tend to benefit more than a group with more takers. A group with many givers has
diversity, and with diversity comes the ability to possess bits and scraps of quality information
that others may not have (Tetlock & Gardner, 2015). To become a superforecaster, I must join a
group of superforecasters, drop the groupthink mentality, and adopt a giver’s mentality. Such a
mentality benefits me more and helps the group achieve its targets of more accurate forecasts.
The qualities of effective leaders require individuals to become everything that
superforecasters are not. Leaders are expected to be confident and decisive in decision-making.
Previous lessons in superforecasting have only demonstrated that one habit superforecasters must
develop questioning themselves even when they think they are right and the ability to critique
their thoughts. What is required to become a leader undermines what is required for one to
become a superforecaster. However, Tetlock & Gardner, 2015 argue that the concepts of
superforecasting can apply to make better leaders. The concept was tested in the German

4
military, where soldiers discussed options with their superiors. Alternative ideas were accepted
and encouraged. This argument supports the school of thought that junior officers are usually on
the front line and have better information regarding the battle frontlines than their troop
commanders. The German commanders succeeded by letting junior officers make critical
judgments when they had good reason to defy the status quo. To achieve great success, good
judgment must always precede bold and daring actions because soldiers’ greatest tool is not their
weapons but their minds (Tetlock & Garder, 2015). There is danger in confidence that can only
be sorted through humility and self-criticism. Humility is accepting that reality is not what we
perceive it, and human judgment can be wrong. Superforecasters develop the knack of having
conflicting ideas in mind and maintaining their ability to function. When evaluating leadership
from the point of superforecasting, it is essential never to underestimate other people’s opinions
and be conscious that someone or something we despise can have impressive qualities.

5

References

Tetlock, P.E & Gardner, D. (2015). Superforecasting: The art and science of prediction.
Retrieved from https://www.redshelf.com