To err is human....
Don't worry, it is not me err'ing, I am Lil Ms. Right after all! :)
More times than not, we attempt to optimise our decision making, to ensure we are committing to the best possible outcome for ourselves and for those who will be effected by our decision. In a perfect world, we carefully consider all possible alternatives, and courses of action. We anticipate potential complications and factor these into our decision making process. Alas, we are mere mortals. We do not have unlimited time, or resources on which to draw to make the ideal decision. We are busy, we don't have the ability to read every document which will give us the appropriate information to make our choice. Add to this, our own personal biases, our life experiences and the beliefs and morals we all hold on to, and we slip further and further away from the ideal of consistently making rational decisions.
Decisions made by individuals are generally less rational than those made by a collective of individuals. The old adage, two brains are better than one, is proven to be true. With more individuals as part of a larger group, comes more experiences and perspectives to which explore the issue. Granted, with more people involved in the decision making process, comes increased personal biases and decision making 'baggage'. But in the long run, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.
We all make decisions in different ways, at different times. Our carefree selection of a place to dine after the footy would not be replicated if we were seeking a restaurant to meet with new clients. The "blue tie / red tie" conundrum pales into insignificance when compared to the decision on how to best proceed on a company restructure. Decision makers generally draw on the best available information, experience and knowledge of past or similar situations, to reach the best outcome. The 'best' decision is not always the most obvious, nor the first choice. The interests of all parties need to be considered.
Sometimes, however, there is simply not enough time to investigate all possible options. There is not enough information readily available to weigh it up and reach a carefully considered outcome. This is where 'satisficing' (Gigerenzer & Todd 2000) comes in. Satisficing is essentially satisfying the basic needs and assessing the information that is available to make a decision. It is knowing that you do not have all of the information, but that you still must determine a course of action. Wow, how many of my decisions as a parent are made using satisficing!
In the words of Justin Herald, "If nothing changes, nothing changes." If decisions are not being made, if new ideas and ways of doing are not explored and adopted, then we are destined to remain on our little mousy treadmill. Sometimes, the past can provide insight into how we are best to proceed, but in our current and ever changing world, our ability to use history as a quasi-crystal ball are becoming limited. Change is the only certainty. Our choices can either move us forward, provide us with a firm and solid foundation, or can keep us tied to our past.
If you would like to read some more about Bounded Rationality and other decision making theories, check out any of these publications:
More times than not, we attempt to optimise our decision making, to ensure we are committing to the best possible outcome for ourselves and for those who will be effected by our decision. In a perfect world, we carefully consider all possible alternatives, and courses of action. We anticipate potential complications and factor these into our decision making process. Alas, we are mere mortals. We do not have unlimited time, or resources on which to draw to make the ideal decision. We are busy, we don't have the ability to read every document which will give us the appropriate information to make our choice. Add to this, our own personal biases, our life experiences and the beliefs and morals we all hold on to, and we slip further and further away from the ideal of consistently making rational decisions.
Decisions made by individuals are generally less rational than those made by a collective of individuals. The old adage, two brains are better than one, is proven to be true. With more individuals as part of a larger group, comes more experiences and perspectives to which explore the issue. Granted, with more people involved in the decision making process, comes increased personal biases and decision making 'baggage'. But in the long run, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.
We all make decisions in different ways, at different times. Our carefree selection of a place to dine after the footy would not be replicated if we were seeking a restaurant to meet with new clients. The "blue tie / red tie" conundrum pales into insignificance when compared to the decision on how to best proceed on a company restructure. Decision makers generally draw on the best available information, experience and knowledge of past or similar situations, to reach the best outcome. The 'best' decision is not always the most obvious, nor the first choice. The interests of all parties need to be considered.
Sometimes, however, there is simply not enough time to investigate all possible options. There is not enough information readily available to weigh it up and reach a carefully considered outcome. This is where 'satisficing' (Gigerenzer & Todd 2000) comes in. Satisficing is essentially satisfying the basic needs and assessing the information that is available to make a decision. It is knowing that you do not have all of the information, but that you still must determine a course of action. Wow, how many of my decisions as a parent are made using satisficing!
In the words of Justin Herald, "If nothing changes, nothing changes." If decisions are not being made, if new ideas and ways of doing are not explored and adopted, then we are destined to remain on our little mousy treadmill. Sometimes, the past can provide insight into how we are best to proceed, but in our current and ever changing world, our ability to use history as a quasi-crystal ball are becoming limited. Change is the only certainty. Our choices can either move us forward, provide us with a firm and solid foundation, or can keep us tied to our past.
If you would like to read some more about Bounded Rationality and other decision making theories, check out any of these publications:
McKee, A. (2010). The Human Side of Planning: Decision making and critical thinking. In Management: A Focus on Leaders, 1st Edn., (pp. 176-209). Sydney: Pearson Australia.
Mingus, M. (2007). Bounded Rationality and Organizational Influence: Herbert Simon and the Behavioral Revolution. In Morcol, G. (Ed.), Handbook of Decision Making (pp. 61-79). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Munro, A. (2009). Bounded Rationality and Public Policy, The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, 12, 133-161. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9473-6_6.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M. (2000). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
Simon, H.A. (1972). Theories of Bounded Rationality. In C.B. McGuire and R. Radner (Eds.), Decison and Organization (pp. 161-176). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing.
Making the 'right' decision can be overwhelming...
Excellent referencing :-)
ReplyDelete