At IVP, even when a partner is passionate about a deal, the firm encourages them to 'sleep on it' after a debate. This deliberate pause allows the partner to process the team's feedback without pressure, often leading to a more rational assessment of their own conviction and preventing investments driven by emotion rather than collective wisdom.

To avoid confirmation bias and make disciplined capital allocation decisions, investors should treat every follow-on opportunity in a portfolio company as if it were a brand-new deal. This involves a full 're-underwriting' process, assessing the current state and future potential without prejudice from past involvement.

Post-mortems of bad investments reveal the cause is never a calculation error but always a psychological bias or emotional trap. Sequoia catalogs ~40 of these, including failing to separate the emotional 'thrill of the chase' from the clinical, objective assessment required for sound decision-making.

To avoid becoming emotionally invested in a deal, it's crucial to institutionalize a "devil's advocate" role. Proactively searching for reasons *not* to do the deal ensures a sober, realistic assessment. The final decision is a calculated risk based on incomplete (e.g., 80%) information.

Gaonkar admits a major mistake wasn't just selling NVIDIA too early, but failing to re-evaluate it later. The sunk cost bias makes it psychologically difficult to revisit past decisions, especially ones that were wrong, causing investors to miss out on significant future gains.

The common advice to overcome sunk cost fallacy—"imagine you didn't own this, would you buy it today?"—is ineffective because you cannot truly ignore the reality of ownership. A more robust method is setting pre-commitment contracts or "kill criteria" that force a decision when specific signals are observed.

Three dangerous mindsets, or "coats of conviction," derail M&A deals. They are: reactive positioning (chasing auctions), integration negligence (delaying planning), and the model mirage (trusting an untested financial model). A disciplined, proactive process is the antidote to these common pitfalls.

Evaluate every check, including follow-on investments, independently from prior commitments. The decision should be based solely on the current risk-adjusted value of that capital, not on past investments, which prevents throwing good money after bad.

To evaluate a commitment—be it a job, investment, or relationship—ask: "Knowing everything I know now, would I choose this again today?" If the answer is no, your attachment is likely based on past investment (sunk cost) rather than future potential, signaling it's time to reassess.