One Better Question: What’s the third option?
Don't just choose between the two doors in front of you. Ask if there's another way out of the room.
Raise your hand if you’ve watched or heard of the show House.
For those of you who aren’t familiar, the show follows Dr. Gregory House as he solves medical cases no other doctor could solve. The show pays homage to Sherlock Holmes (complete with archetypal sidekick, Dr. James Wilson).
In the first season of the show, Ed Vogler, a billionaire pharmaceutical executive, donates a large sum to Princeton-Plainsboro Hospital and becomes the new Chairman of the Board. The major string attached to that money? Total deference to Vogler’s will.
House doesn’t bend.
After a few tussles, Vogler moves to fire House to demonstrate his dominance. Lisa Cuddy, Dean of Medicine and Chief Hospital Administrator, manages to protect his job, but Vogler has a new game: House has to fire one of the people on his team under the guise of saving money.
So it’s fire someone and stay, or fire no one and be forced to leave.
Or is it?
.
What’s the third option?
As a strategic thinker, you rarely face a true binary choice. Believing you do is a trap that limits your choices unnecessarily and unwisely.
Our brains crave binary choices because they are efficient. Sorting the world into ‘safe or unsafe,’ ‘us or them,’ or ‘win or lose’ reduces cognitive load and offers a comforting sense of certainty. It creates a flat, manageable map of a complex territory.
But while this flattening makes the world easier to process, it makes it impossible to navigate effectively because you limit your options and understanding.
By asking, “What’s the third option?” you open your aperture and adjust your angle. You force yourself to consider different frames that contain different options and combinations beyond the two that seem to be the only choices.
In other words, don’t just choose between the two doors in front of you. Ask if there’s another way out of the room.
.
.
How to Put It Into Practice
You will inevitably face a situation where you feel you have only two choices — or worse, only one.
As you start to feel boxed in, stop and ask the question. Then consider second-level questions that adjust the aperture and angle:
Where can I combine elements from the two I’m considering?
What if I change the scale?
What if I add or remove a constraint?
Where am I making an assumption that may be holding me back?
In House’s case, he sees a third option: Adjust what people are paid so he can keep all three of his team members and his job.
What’s an either/or situation on your plate right now that could be reframed to reveal a third option?
.
.
Hi! I’m Katie
I run The Better Questions Project. In addition to writing this newsletter, I speak, cultivate a community, and work directly with teams. Here’s how you can work with me:
Speaking: Bring me in to challenge assumptions and explore frameworks to think more strategically.
Community: Join The Glaede, a space for those who find deep thinking fun.
Direct: Work with me 1-on-1 at Point:Value to ask the right questions and evolve your value.
.
The House example nails it because Vogler set up what looked like a forced move, but House saw through the artificial constraint. In negotiations this comes up alot where someone frames it like "take this deal or walk away," when really there's usually room to restructure terms or timelines. I've found that just asking "what if we changed X" often reveals the other side wasn't as locked in as they claimed. The scale question is underrated too.