The Psychological Basis of Quality Decision Making
AbstractEffective strategic management requires analysis, decisions and actions by an organization to create and sustain competitive advantage. Gooddecisions are obviously desirable but whether the decision is good is a judgment call, often after the fact, and is itself subject to bias. What is less subject to debate is the process that leads to accuracy or quality decision making.Â This requires not just access to available information but proper processing, interpretation and integration of that data.Â Critical is the consideration of multiple options and perspectives at all stages and there are a myriad of reasons why people do not do that.Â Defective decisions come from poor information search, selective bias in processing the information, a lack of considering alternatives, a failure to examine the risks of the preferred choice and a rush to judgment (Janis and Mann 1977).Â In short, the selection, interpretation and integration of information is â€œbiasedâ€. Â In this brief overview, we consider â€œbiasâ€ both at the individual and the group level.Â The overarching perspective is that there are psychological reasons that constrain and bias thought and there are also psychological antidotes that can improve it.Â Â The former are more numerous and well documented than the latter but in both individual and group decision making, the influences are predictable, pervasive and profound, leading at times to defective decision making and at other times to better and even creative decision making.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley in its series Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series with number qt84f0q6jj.
Date of creation: 28 Aug 2012
Date of revision:
Social and Behavioral Sciences; decisions; biases; creativity; dissent; divergent thought;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.