Those errors of the mind that influence corporate decision-making processes

How many decisions are made in a day? Countless. Research carried out by B. Sahakian and J. N. LaBuzzetta for Cornell University shows that each person is responsible for an average of 35,000 decisions per day. It should be pointed out that of these, many are minor if not, often, unconscious. Such as choosing whether to postpone your morning wake-up call or the number of teaspoons of sugar to pour into your coffee. Such choices are mediated by the so-called 'System 1', which psychologist Daniel Kahneman refers to for fast thinking, that is, automatic and instinctive thinking. Quite different from 'System 2', which represents slow, rational thinking, and which is activated when dealing with demanding mental tasks such as performing a mathematical operation or comparing the price between two products.

It is the use of System 1 that leads to the so-called cognitive biases, now well known even to non-neuroscience experts. Although they enjoy a negative reputation, these 'errors of the mind' serve a specific and functional purpose: to save cognitive energy. In practice, in making a judgement or decision, mental shortcuts called heuristics are unconsciously used, which attribute meaning to the surrounding reality by exploiting preconceptions inherited from experience or culture. These are shortcuts linked to human survival: it is thanks to them that seeing a fire advancing one is instinctively driven to run in the opposite direction. The problem, if anything, is the unconscious activation of System 1 to define decisions requiring thoughtful reasoning.

This is what happens, for example, within a personnel selection process when a candidate is chosen not because of his or her actual skills but because he or she is good-looking (halo effect), because he or she is more similar to the person who previously occupied the role (status quo bias) or even because he or she was interviewed after a candidate who was totally unsuitable for the role sought (contrast effect).

Kahneman himself later introduced the concept ofnoise to define those decision-making errors that occur as a consequence of the random variability of the moment in which a judgement or decision is made. Remaining in the area of personnel selection, an HR might unconsciously be harsher than usual due to irritation caused by morning traffic, weather conditions, or the favourite team defeated in a match played the night before.

Awareness and the consequent overcoming of cognitive biases and noise allow one to base one's decisions on objective elements, making them strategic and no longer subjective and hegoriferous. To cope with these instinctive mechanisms, anti-bias strategies must be systematically implemented, and the most effective technique within interpersonal relationships is the question, a tool as simple as it is powerful. People are inclined to make assumptions and make decisions accordingly: asking allows these assumptions to be confirmed or refuted, making the decision-making process more strategic. Beyond questioning, an anti-bias technique in management is represented by co-design: instead of imposing a decision, it is constructed together with employees, enjoying different points of view and identifying a solution derived from the sum of everyone's ideas.