Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Leaders as Decision Architects John Beshears & Francesca Gino (Engage…
Leaders as Decision Architects
John Beshears & Francesca Gino
Leader role
Alter the enviroment in which decisión, people are more likely yo make choices that lead to good outcomes
Leader can do acting as architects
Encourage good decision making
Approach five steps
Understand the systematic error in decision making that can occur
#
Determine whether bahavioral issues are at the heart ir the poor decisiones in question
Pinpoint the specific underlying causes
#
Redesign the decision-making context to mitigate the negative the negative impacts of biases and inadequate motivation
#
Rigorously test the solution
#
Understand how decisiones are made
Modes of processing information and making decisions
System 1 thinking
#
Automatic,instinctive and emotional
Mental shortcuts
Negative effect: poor follow-throught on plans
Focus on concrete
System 2 thinking
:
#
Slow, logical and deliberate
Cognitive effort/ methodical system
As the cognitive energy needed can problems of bias and inadequate motivation may arise
#
Motivation
.
Both (System 1& 2) must work together
Define the problem
Human behavior is at the core of the problem
Employee burnout
Can be resolved by changing the way people perceive and respond to a situation
People are acting in ways contrary to their own best interests
People to switch from choices that are contrary to interests
Complex organizational problems can be broken down into smaller, more manageable pieces
Diagnose underlying causes
Insufficient motivation
Cognitive biases
Design the solution
#
Architecture and nudges
The goal is to improve people's decisions by carefully structuring how information and options are presented to them
Companies can nudge employees in a certain direction without taking away their freedom to make decision for themselves
Individuals acting in their self-interest
Change the way employees process information an make decision
Trigger system 1: emotions and biases can be tapped for productive purposes
Arouse emotions
Lower employee and higher performance
Harness biases
Cognitive biases to their advantage
Loss aversion, the people feel twice as bad about incurring a loss as they feel good about receiving a gain of the same amount
Vividness bias, people pay extra attention to vivid information and overlook less flashy data
Simplify the process
Streamlining processes
Engage System 2
Use joint, rather than separate, evaluations
Focus more on employees' past performance and less on gender and implicit stereotype
Encourage the consideration of disconfirming evidence
Steps
Confirmation bias
Interpret any available information as supporting that thinking
Escalation of commitment
Create opportunities for reflection
Use planning prompts
Simple prompts can help employees stick to the plan
Create clear maps for reaching their goals that detail the "when" and the "how"
Inspire broader thinking
Consider solutions to ethical dilemas that move beyond selecting one option over another
Increase accountability
Holding individuals accountable for their judgments and actions increpases the likelihood that they will be vigilant about eliminating bias from their decision making
Use reminders
Highlight goals we want to accomplish
Identify the desired outcome
Identify possible solutions and focus on oneroso
Introduce the change in some areas of the organization ( the "treatment group") and not others (the "control group")
Bypass both systems
Changing the default for standard processes
Build in automatic adjustments that account for poor system 1 and 2 thinking
The companies first consider by-passing both systems so that the desired outcome is implemented automatically
Test the solution