15 July 2007
Successful Intentions Newsletter
Hi ,
What makes a good decision?
Contestants on the current TV quiz show, "Deal or No Deal" struggle with that question every week night. "Should I take the deal, and potentially miss out an even bigger payout? Or should I risk opening one more case with the chance of losing everything?"
A good rational decision is simply balancing utility (benefit of the outcome) with probability (calculated success or failure of achieving the outcome). Or is it?
Stacks of research now shows that most decisions we make are distorted by what we're feeling at the time. For example, we react to the prospect of risk at two levels: We evaluate the risk cognitively (thinking) and we react to it emotionally, but although these two processes are linked they can also occur independently. In other words, we can experience fear about a decision without even knowing what we're afraid of!
We also anticipate what a decision will feel like before we experience it. And when it doesn't work out as expected, we have a special talent for restructuring our view of the outcomes so that we experience them more positively! And when faced with personal uncertainty over freely making a decision that goes against our attitudes, we react defensively by spontaneously emphasizing certainty and conviction about other attitudes we hold, or by compensating through reminding ourselves of how good and virtuous we are in other aspects of our behaviour!
So, , how do you make a good decision without too much emotional bias?
There are two decision making strategies, vigilant and hypervigilant.
Under a vigilant decision making process the decision maker:
- Thoroughly scans all available information,
- Scans information in a systematic and sequential manner,
- Devotes a consistent amount of attention to each data point, and
- Reviews all alternatives before making a decision.
This strategy is most effective when the decision is less complex and ill structured, when data are unambiguous, and when time is not constrained.
But life is messy! We rarely have the time to adopt such an analytical approach and the information we have to work with is often ambiguous. And if we are reasonably familiar with the environment it's possible to be more selective (and faster) with the evaluation of information.
Research suggests that in the real world a hypervigilant decision making process is actually more effective. The decision maker:
- Scans only that information needed to make an assessment,
- Scans information in any sequence,
- Rapidly attends to selected data points, and
- Reviews needed information only when required.
The idea is to get more flexible in your decision making strategies. Work out when it's best to use a simpler, hypervigilant strategy, and when the situation and available time allows you to apply a more analytical vigilant decision making process.
, if you missed the Third Australian Evidence-Based Coaching Conference in Sydney, July 6-7, you can download my presentation here, [http://www.intentional.com.au/docs/17_Webb_2007.pdf "Coaching for Wisdom"
(2007). In: Grant, A.M., & Cavanagh, M.J. (Eds.), Evidence-based Coaching Volume Two: Resources from the 2003-2007 Sydney Conferences (CD-ROM), Sydney AU, CPU Press].
Keep your intentions clear,
Peter Webb
Home
| Manage subscription (Unsubscribe, change e-mail, text only)
