The Four Lenses

I once came out of an interview for a team lead role convinced the candidate was great. A colleague who had heard exactly the same answers came out convinced we couldn't put that person in charge of anyone. We had sat through the same hour, and each of us had been looking for something completely different.

Figure 1. The Four Lenses

What it is

The Four Lenses are four questions you can ask about any decision, person or project. Benefits asks what you could gain. Risks asks what could go wrong. Data asks what you actually know. Gut asks what your experience is telling you.

Most of us answer one of those questions first and give the others less weight than they deserve. When a whole team shares the same habit, it keeps missing the same things. Working through all four on purpose is how you find what your first instinct skipped.

How it works

Benefits

What could we gain if this works?

Be specific about who benefits and what changes for them. A line like "we'd be on shelves three weeks before our main competitor" gives the group something real to weigh. This is the lens optimists reach for first, so if it's yours, finish it quickly and move on to the others.

Risks

What could go wrong, and what would we do about it?

Name the problems that are likely and the ones you couldn't live with. Then sort them into the ones you can prevent, the ones you can soften and the ones you just need a plan for. People who start here often get called negative, and they are often the first to spot an expensive mistake.

Data

What do we actually know?

List the facts that bear on the decision and where each one came from. Then write down what you're assuming and what you would need to find out. Past results count here too. If the last two rushed launches both drew quality complaints, that is evidence, and it belongs on this list.

Gut

What is my experience telling me?

Say what your instinct is and try to name the experience behind it. A feeling you can't explain yet is still worth writing down as something to check before you commit. Gut matters most when the facts run out, so make sure it isn't filling in for facts nobody went and gathered.

When to reach for it

A decision meeting keeps circling the same few arguments without getting any closer to a choice
You've already made up your mind about a person or a project and want to test that judgment before you act on it
You're writing to a group whose members will each read your message looking for something different

“I used to think the people who pointed out risks should be fired, because they were sucking all the positive energy out of the room.”

A worked example

Northbank Kitchens, a fictional soup maker, had a new line due to launch in March. Two weeks before the production run, its packaging supplier said the boxes would be late. The leadership team spent most of its first meeting on the sales case for holding the date, and by the end it was leaning toward March.

The chief executive asked the team to go back through the decision one lens at a time, with everyone answering every question. On Benefits, March would put the line on shelves before a competitor's spring promotion. On Risks, late packaging would squeeze the first production run into a single week. On Data, the supplier had been an average of nine days late all year, both grocery chains had said April would work, and the last two launches with a rushed first run had both drawn quality complaints. On Gut, the operations lead said plainly that they didn't trust a one-week run, and when asked why, pointed straight at those complaints.

The team moved the launch to April. The chains had already said they could take the later date, and nobody wanted a third launch remembered for its complaints. The head of sales called both buyers that afternoon to confirm the change.

Try it this week

Pick one decision you have to make in the next few days. By the end you'll have either a choice or the one question you need answered before you can make it.

Write the decision at the top of a page and add four headings, Benefits, Risks, Data and Gut.
Fill in all four headings, and mark anything you're assuming rather than know for certain.
Notice which heading was hardest to fill in, because that is probably the lens you usually skip.
Ask someone who tends to see things differently from you to add what you missed under that heading.
Make the call and write down who acts and by when, or, if something is still missing, who will find it out and by when.

Try it with AI

Copy this prompt into ChatGPT, Claude or any AI assistant and fill in the part in square brackets. It will walk you through the model one step at a time, using your own situation.

Prompt

I'm facing this decision: [describe the decision and the options you're weighing].

If you can open links, read https://www.colincox.com/library/four-lenses first. It explains the Four Lenses, which look at a decision through Benefits (what we could gain), Risks (what could go wrong and what we'd do about it), Data (what we actually know and what we're assuming) and Gut (what my experience is telling me).

Take one lens at a time. Ask me one or two questions about each lens and wait for my answers before you move on. Tell me which lens I'm saying the least about, and push me on that one.

Finish by summarizing what each lens showed. Then ask me what I've decided, who will act on it, and by when.

Leave out names and anything confidential before you paste in your situation.

From Colin's work

By default I am a glass-half-full, optimistic Canadian, and when I moved to London I landed in a culture with a much healthier respect for what could go wrong. I'm embarrassed to say that I used to think the people who pointed out risks should be fired, because they were sucking all the positive energy out of the room.

I was a manager there, and we had a vacant team lead position. In the debrief after we interviewed one candidate, my London colleagues asked what I thought. I said, "Oh yeah, look at this awesome thing and this benefit and that benefit."

One of my London colleagues said, "You're barking mad. Look at this red flag and this red flag and this red flag. There's absolutely no way we can put them in charge of people here."

My colleague was right, and I had gone into that interview laser focused on looking for green. Not only did I not see the red flags, I actively devalued them, because it wasn't how I saw the world. These days I go looking for the people who see a decision differently from me, because those differences in perspective are an invisible part of diversity, and they make a team stronger.

Related tools

An original model by Colin Cox

Want help putting this to work with your team? Book a free thirty minutes with Colin.