You think you're a great decision maker. But what if you're actually making these common mistakes?

Confirmation bias is often easily visible when you think you are making a decision but actually do not have any real alternatives to choose from. You may have some alternative options on your list, but non of these have the same level of definition (not as worked out, long list of 'cons' and very few 'pros', lots more (perceived) Risks. You should challenge yourself to list you main 'cons' with the alternatives and see what you could do to either dispel or validate that contra argument (quantification, fact check, peer or specialist input etc). Another way to catch confirmation bias is to talk someone else through your reasoning, someone will catch on quick due to the (body)language and gaps in logic if you have a clear favorite!

As a recruiter, I have had multiple instances where HMs identifies a candidate but put them on hold to compare with other candidates before making the final decision. This indirectly impacts the whole process i.e. candidate experience, hiring delays & recruitment team morale. While as a TA adviser I encourage HMs to evaluate and compare but to avoid putting right fit on hold in search of perfect fit (who brings wow factor). So, I always suggest them to find a resource who holds decent knowledge in required domain with a learning mindset. Considering how fast technology is evolving we have to adapt and learn new technologies as quicker as possible. More of hunting and less of finalizing the right resource is an Analysis Paralysis for me.

Confirmation bias is a huge risk that often leads to high turnover, low morale, and distrust in leadership...simply put. If you choose to roll the dice, please have someone else take a look at the candidate as well.

O viés de confirma??o influencia a maneira como as pessoas avaliam alega??es, interagem com o mundo ao seu redor e absorvem informa??es. é uma forma de buscar, mesmo que inconscientemente, uma confirma??o para suas próprias cren?as e opini?es, evadindo-se de vis?es e perspectivas diferentes.

Overconfidence: Trusting your judgment too much without sufficient evidence. Confirmation Bias: Favoring information that confirms existing beliefs. Anchoring: Relying too heavily on the first piece of information encountered. Sunk Cost Fallacy: Continuing a project based on already invested resources rather than future benefits. Groupthink: Prioritising harmony over critical evaluation in group decisions. Availability Heuristic: Overestimating the importance of information that is readily available. Emotional Decisions: Letting feelings override objective analysis. Failure to Consider Opportunity Costs: Ignoring what you have to give up when making a choice. Information Overload: Becoming paralysed by too much data.

I try to adopt the 80/20 or the good enough rule to avoid analysis paralysis. Aim for satisfactory solutions rather than perfection. In many cases, a good enough decision made promptly is far more valuable than a perfect one made too late. This approach, encourages you to set clear, achievable criteria for decision-making. Once an option meets these criteria, proceed without second-guessing. By accepting that not every decision requires exhaustive analysis, you free yourself to move forward, learn from the outcomes, and adapt as necessary. Embracing "good enough" can be liberating, turning the paralysis of choice into actionable steps forward.

In my experience, using the rule of 70%+ of information needed to move forward and advance has been useful. Allows more nimble decision making and also a focus on the right type of data/inputs vs. swimming in analysis.

Most of decisions are multi-criteria decisions, but stil one need to choose the most relevant criterias to take into consideration. Pareto principle is good to use to avoid analysis paralysis. Hovewer, making any decision is better than being paralysed.

Sometimes it happens that an idea strikes & we execute, however in the aftermath of things we do a lot of analysis. This retrospection is fine till the time it does not becomes case of analysis paralysis, which is when on too much retrospection one starts doubting the execution. Analysing is good till the time it does not become a self doubt leading to lost opportunities & delay in grabbing the deal at the right time

In my experience, to avoid paralysis by analysis, the minimum viable product must be established and the deliverable aligned with the different key areas of the business. Additionally, 80% certainty and 20% uncertainty must be established as manageable risk.

In my experience, the best way to deal with Sunk-Cost Fallacy (or any other bias) is to ask yourself and the group great timed questions. For example, are the decision makers overly attached to a history of past decisions? What are they afraid of losing? How have they defined failure and success for this situation? What would I do if someone else had decided to invest? Consider the issue as if you were a new CEO. More importantly when it comes to Sunk-cost Fallacy is — and that’s counterintuitive — to resist the analysis: most of the time, the people attached (especially emotionally) to the issue will come up with ways to justify the investment in “finishing” whatever they already started even though it makes little sense financially.

from my own experience, to avoid sunk cost fallacy: firstly, you must have the enough courage to say its time to stop this project. secondly, by assessing each phase of such project would be important to forecast the end result.

I believe clinging to a decision based on past investments of time or money even when situations has changed and the initial choice is no longer relevant. Letting go of sunk costs is crucial for making rational decisions based on present circumstances...

To avoid falling into the sunk cost pitfall, it is important to run decision making scenarios with pessimistic, normal and optimistic assumptions. Calculating NPV and IRR under all circumstances and understanding risk and rewards will avoid this pitfall.

Its better to have some knowledge on which you want to take decision, having less knowledge is very harmful to be in state of maker, also it is very obivious to be struck in any position of biasness Better is to get a firm knowledged and to explore every aspect to be set as a descision maker.

Overcoming the anchoring effect requires a keen awareness of its influence on our negotiations and decision-making. Before entering negotiations, arm yourself with a range of possible outcomes and predefined objectives. This preparation enables you to set your own anchors and adjust your strategy dynamically in response to counter-anchors. Practicing mock negotiations with colleagues or mentors can also sharpen your skills, helping you to recognize and counteract anchoring tactics, ensuring you approach negotiations with confidence and strategic insight.

To sidestep the anchoring effect, begin with a blank slate approach. Before evaluating new information or making decisions, consciously set aside any initial numbers or estimates presented to you. This prevents these figures from unduly influencing your judgment. Next, seek out a broad range of data and perspectives. By actively gathering diverse inputs, you dilute the impact of any single anchor. Additionally, use structured decision-making frameworks that require you to weigh multiple factors equally, rather than allowing one piece of information to dominate.

Fine-tuning our judgments is key to getting a clear picture. It's about taking a moment to look at things from different angles so we can see the whole picture. Sometimes, that means pausing to gather more info and explore other options before we make up our minds. And if we're feeling stuck, it's okay to reach out to others for their thoughts. They might offer a fresh perspective or some helpful info we hadn't considered. It's all about working together to make the best decisions we can.

The anchoring effect can happen especially when you have the urgency to make quick decisions and do not have time to evaluate and analyze in depth. Therefore, it is important to have reliable sources from the beginning so that if necessary, the available information is as accurate as possible.

In my experience using the anchoring effect in negotiation of a salary leads to later job dissatisfaction, always research the market rate for the position based off your experience. Come to the table with a range. Ask questions about the current position responsibilities and potential growth opportunities. Ask for the budget range for the position before you make your decision. Negotiate potential bonus.

A few years ago, I missed a critical deadline for an assignment, leading to feelings of guilt and regret. Reflecting on the situation, I realized I had fallen victim to hindsight bias, overestimating my ability to predict and prevent the outcome. To overcome this bias, I began documenting my decision-making process, evaluating results objectively, and acknowledging the complexity of each situation. This experience taught me the importance of humility and self-awareness in learning from failure and making more informed decisions in the future.

To mitigate hindsight bias, integrating structured reflective practices into team workflows can be incredibly beneficial. Implementing after-action reviews (AARs) after completing projects or making significant decisions allows teams to dissect what happened, why it happened, and how it can be done better next time, without the distortion of hindsight bias. This practice not only enhances learning and development but also fosters a culture of openness and continuous improvement, where every team member feels valued and empowered to contribute to the organization's success.

Hindsight bias often leads us to overestimate our ability to have predicted or prevented outcomes, especially after the facts are known. A crucial mitigation strategy involves seeking honest, anonymous feedback. Scientific journals exemplify this through blind peer reviews, ensuring unbiased evaluations without fear of retaliation. Implementing such anonymous channels in everyday life and work settings, however, presents challenges. Encouraging frank, open dialogues with friends or instituting anonymous feedback systems within companies can offer insights, but it demands emotional maturity to accept criticism constructively. This approach, while difficult, promotes a culture of continuous improvement and objective assessment.

I agree, l have made decisions that l have regretted because l did not document the decision at the time l made it. Looking at the past without the documented facts for that period sways everyone’s minds on why you made the decision at that time.

I think is the most common situation in my work day. We need looking options for minimize the risk and share with partner's new opportunities

Developing skills such as emotional intelligence and strategic foresight can significantly enhance decision-making capabilities. Engaging in targeted training programs, such as mindfulness workshops for emotional intelligence or scenario planning exercises for strategic foresight, can provide practical tools and techniques for navigating complex decisions. Additionally, creating organizational practices that celebrate learning from failure, such as hosting "failure forums" where teams share lessons learned from unsuccessful initiatives, can encourage risk-taking and innovation within a supportive environment.

Don't forget to check these elements to start your decision-making process on the right foot. Check your physiological needs (are you hungry, thirsty, or need to go to the toilet?). It seems silly, but a few people pay attention to it. Check the perceived safety of your environment. When you don't feel safe, your cognitive energies move from decision-making to survival mode. A loud or noisy environment is particularly bad if you need clarity of mind. Check your state. Are you angry or upset? The worst state, the biggest enemy of a good decision, is a lack of time. If you are rushing, please consider postponing the decision because a great decision and rush don't belong in the same sentence. This is too often underestimated or neglected.

Great decision makers are still not infallible. People who have had consistent success in their decisions - this can be a mix of personal and professional decisions - tend to veer towards the over confidence zone. This in turn may make them careless or brash. This is one pitfall to watch out for. Stay rational despite your track record and be aware of your own fallibility.

The beautiful thing about these mistakes is that science and the availability of data keeps improving. I mean, the fact that we understand that confirmation bias is a thing means that we can now do something about it, right? Some people will feel all dejected when they learn, after the fact, that they made a mistake due to one of these newly identified biases... Well, guess what? At least you made a decision! Some people are immobilized by fear and therefore never make decisions! It's called a "lessons- learned" and 'retrospective' for a good reason. Use the information you have available today and make the best decision you can. If you make a mistake, learn from it. Make better ones tomorrow!

In avoiding biases in decision-making, also consider the importance of feedback loops. Regularly review your decisions and their outcomes. This practice helps identify patterns of bias in your thinking and decision-making processes. Learning from each decision, successful or not, fine-tunes your judgment and reduces bias over time.