MMarketing Against The Grain
← All frameworks
StrategyAlex Lieberman

Lens Stacking

Assess one decision through multiple mental models to remove blind spots.

Difficulty
Advanced
Time to result
~months to results
Steps
6
Confidence
94%

Lens Stacking evaluates the same situation through several distinct mental models, historical examples, or disciplinary perspectives. The thinker first defines the decision, then analyzes it independently through lenses such as incentives, opportunity cost, customer behavior, organizational design, or precedent. Each lens exposes particular risks and opportunities while leaving others hidden. The analyses are then compared for agreement, tension, and unresolved blind spots. Stacking does not mean collecting quotations or mechanically naming models; the value comes from allowing each lens to change the interpretation of the decision. The result is a more complete strategic assessment, an explicit account of uncertainty, and a decision that is less dependent on the leader's habitual way of seeing the world.

Origin

Alex Lieberman described lens stacking on Marketing Against The Grain as part of the critical-thinking ability associated with Charlie Munger.

Core principles

  • 01Every single lens has blind spots.
  • 02Different disciplines reveal different consequences.
  • 03Previous examples and history provide reusable lenses.
  • 04Better decisions emerge from comparing, not merely collecting, perspectives.

How to run it

  1. 1

    Frame the decision

    State the exact choice, desired outcome, constraints, and time horizon.

    Pro tip Separate the decision from the preferred answer.

    Watch out A vague question makes different lenses impossible to compare.

  2. 2

    Choose distinct lenses

    Select mental models, past examples, or disciplines that illuminate different mechanisms.

    Pro tip Include at least one lens outside your strongest field.

    Watch out Multiple versions of the same viewpoint do not create genuine coverage.

  3. 3

    Analyze independently

    Apply each lens without forcing it to confirm conclusions from the previous one.

    Pro tip Write the implication, evidence, and uncertainty for every lens.

    Watch out Using model names as labels without applying their mechanism creates false rigor.

  4. 4

    Compare the views

    Identify conclusions supported by several lenses and tensions where the lenses disagree.

    Pro tip Pay particular attention to consequences visible through only one lens.

    Watch out Do not resolve disagreement merely by choosing the most familiar perspective.

  5. 5

    Map blind spots

    Ask what important stakeholder, time horizon, system, or failure mode remains unexamined.

    Pro tip Invite someone with different expertise to challenge the stack.

    Watch out No number of models eliminates uncertainty completely.

  6. 6

    Synthesize and monitor

    Make the decision using the combined assessment and define evidence that would trigger reassessment.

    Pro tip Preserve the lens notes so later outcomes can improve future judgment.

    Watch out Do not let analysis indefinitely postpone a reversible decision.

In the wild

Evaluate a new subscription product

A media company assesses a paid product through customer-value, incentives, opportunity-cost, brand, and operational-capacity lenses. Customer value supports launch, but the incentive lens predicts content distortion and the capacity lens exposes support costs. The company narrows the offer and runs a limited pilot with explicit cancellation and support metrics.

The decision preserves the opportunity while reducing risks that a revenue-only analysis would miss.

Common mistakes

Collecting models without applying them

Naming several mental models creates intellectual decoration unless each changes or tests the analysis.

Using correlated lenses

Closely related perspectives can create an illusion of confirmation while sharing the same blind spots.

Expecting certainty

Lens stacking reduces blind spots but cannot remove every unknown or eliminate the need to decide.

Is it for you?

Best for

It is best for consequential business decisions involving several interacting systems, incentives, and uncertainties.

Not ideal for

It is unnecessarily heavy for low-stakes, reversible choices requiring a quick response.

From the transcript

whether you call it mental models, whether you call it lens stacking, looking at situations through different lenses, whether it's by leveraging previous example or…

Alex Lieberman · 25:00

he has this patchwork of mental models or ways of assessing the same situation in different ways.

Alex Lieberman · 25:00

And it leads to basically removing as many blind spots as you can from assessing the strategy of your business, big decisions you're going to…

Alex Lieberman · 25:30

From the episode

Framework Thinking for Success With Alex Lieberman

Alex Lieberman