Vanishing Options Test

5. Vanishing Options Test

Another technique you can use to break out of a narrow frame is to run the Vanishing Options Test. The conceit here is that Aladdin’s genie has an eccentric older brother who, instead of granting three wishes to a person, arbitrarily takes options away. Below, we give you a generic form of the Vanishing Options Test, which you can adapt to your situation:

You cannot choose any of the current options you’re considering.

What else could you do?

To see how the Vanishing Options Test can help you evade a narrow frame, consider a conversation we had with Margaret Sanders, the director of career services for a graduate school of government. (Names in this case study are disguised to prevent embarrassment.) Sanders was struggling with a tough decision: Should she tolerate a marginally performing employee or, as she put it, “begin the ridiculously long and tedious process for documentation of poor performance that can eventually lead to termination”?

The employee in question was her administrative assistant, Anna, who had two primary responsibilities. First, she handled administrative tasks, such as tracking expenses and managing the group’s database, and second, she served as the “front door”—the face of the office, the first point of contact for students seeking jobs or for recruiters seeking students. While Anna was good with the first set of tasks, she struggled with the social aspect of her job. She was much more introverted than Sanders had realized during their interview. “I think it hurts for her to talk to people,” said Sanders. Unfortunately, the social side of the job was critical, and Anna’s shyness made the center less effective.

But firing Anna was not an easy answer. The university had strict protocols for handling terminations. It would be many months, Sanders knew, before Anna would be gone—if she was gone at all—and in the meantime, it would be incredibly awkward to work with her in an intimate office of five people.

Dan Heath had the chance to speak with Sanders as she was agonizing about whether or not to fire Anna. And—to interrupt the story for a moment—we hope your “narrow frame” alarm bells went off as you read that phrase, “whether or not to fire Anna.” That phrase “whether or not” is a classic warning signal that you haven’t explored all your options.

So, in keeping with that idea, Dan tried pushing Sanders with the Vanishing Options Test:

DAN: Imagine that I told you you’re stuck with Anna indefinitely and you can’t rely on her to be the “front door.” She cannot be the face of the office anymore. What would you do?

SANDERS: Hmmm … We could move her out of the front door and try to staff the front door differently. Maybe the professional staff could take an hour each, and we could get some work-study students in to fill in the rest of the time.

DAN: Is that a viable option? Could you afford to hire work-study students?

SANDERS: They are super cheap. We only pay about 25% of their hourly rate, which comes out to about $2.50 per hour.

Notice how easy it was for Sanders to break out of her narrow frame with a bit of prodding. It took less than a minute for her to generate another reasonable option—to hire work-study students to serve as the “front door,” with Anna shifting to full-time administrative duties. It was an option that would fix the problem and cost only $20 per day! (Not to mention the benefit from the extra time Anna could spend on database or accounting work.)

The breakthrough that Margaret Sanders experienced is not unusual. When people imagine that they cannot have an option, they are forced to move their mental spotlight elsewhere—really move it—often for the first time in a long while. (In contrast, when people are asked to “generate another option,” they often halfheartedly shift the spotlight a couple of inches, suggesting a minor variant of an existing alternative.)

The old saying “Necessity is the mother of invention” seems to apply here. Until we are forced to dig up a new option, we’re likely to stay fixated on the ones we already have. So our eccentric genie, who seems at first glance to be cruel—he’s taking away our options!—may actually be kindhearted. Removing options can in fact do people a favor, because it makes them notice that they’re stuck on one small patch of a wide landscape. (Of course, we should be clear that people respond much more cheerfully when you metaphorically, rather than literally, remove their options.)

In the call with Margaret Sanders, Dan acted as a decision adviser. You can play that role for colleagues and loved ones by helping them consider alternatives.

When you hear the telltale signs of a narrow frame—people wondering “whether or not” they should make a certain decision or rehashing arguments endlessly about the same limited set of choices—help them widen their options.

Prod them for their opportunity cost; what else could they do with the same time and money? Or try the Vanishing Options Test: Ask them what they’d do if their current alternatives disappeared.

Being stuck in a narrow frame is hard to recognize—but only when you’re the one inside it. From the outside, as an adviser, you may find it easier to notice when coworkers or children are unduly limiting their choices. A wider view can sometimes make a big difference.