Decision Making and History

Control what you can control. What can we control? We determine our attitude, our choices, and our effort. 

The late Don Meyer reminds us, “I don’t make decisions because they are convenient, easy, or popular, I make them because they are right.” Embedded within ‘right’ is the concept of for whom and by whom the decisions are made. 

Bill Russell believed there were two types of leadership, “inside out”, decisions made by leaders for leaders, and “outside in”, decisions made for the well-being of the organization. Russell opined, “my ego demands the success of my team.” That certainly worked out for the fourteen championship teams associated with him.

In his annual letter to players, ten time NCAA Champion coach John Wooden informed players that although they may not always agree with his decisions, those choices would always be in the best interest of the team. 

Not all decisions are made with careful deliberation. In fact, Gary Klein in “Sources of Power” discusses “recognition primed decisions.” For example, In professional firefighting and battlefield operations, leaders identify a given situation and respond in a stereotyped manner based on training and experience. Critical, time-sensitive decisions often don’t allow for review and idea exchange before action. But the key words are training and expertise, as commanders or their delegates must understand “commander’s intent”.

The Heath Brothers explore decision-making in “Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work.” Although many sources of biases exist, they emphasize: framing, confirmation bias, overconfidence, and emotion.” Framing means how you set up the decision. Henry Kissinger suggested three options for President Richard Nixon during Vietnam - status quo, nuclear option, and withdrawal. The argument goes that the tragic ‘status quo’ became more palatable under few provided alternatives. Confirmation bias means to read and study only what agrees with your position, reinforcing your beliefs. Overconfidence is easily illustrated by studies of handicappers given more data to pick racing winners. Although accuracy doesn’t improve, confidence does. And we all realize the impact of emotion in making daily choices in relationships, work, and suffering/sacrifice.

Anchoring is another important source of bias, as we assign value and make choices based on factors that may not accurately reflect value or capabilities. We may choose based on age, gender, institutional association, or other factors which should not necessarily impact our decision. For example, when judges were given a pair of dice to roll before hearing a theoretical case for sentencing, judges rolling a low number assigned a lower sentence than judges rolling a high number. Do you want your fate determined literally by a throw of the dice?

Stephen M.R. Covey categorizes credibility in choice in “The Speed of Trust” among values and productivity. Integrity and intent are important, but capabilities and results matter, too. Well-meaning but ineffective leaders fail. Results without integrity and intent ultimately destroy an organization - whether that be a family, business, team, community, or society.

2002 economics Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman discusses both heuristic and rational decision-making in his epic “Thinking: Fast and Slow”. Our evolutionary past required reflexive thinking for survival in the African savannah. That approach often serves us poorly when making complex business or personal decisions.

Todd Harrison, founder of Minyanville, talks about the importance of assessing “the other side of the trade”. Weighing the pros and cons of action or inaction, the benefits and the risks of decisions (“life is about the management of risk”) determines both the outcome and the scale of wins and losses.

Nassim Taleb helped popularize the term “black swan” in his eponymous book. He argues that we can foresee many major life catastrophes (usually in retrospect), by simply looking. For example, the biggest financial hit taken in Las Vegas occurred when a performer was attacked and seriously injured by a tiger in a stage show. Who could have seen that coming?

What does this have to do with Melrose? Long-time residents remember the fiasco over multimillion dollar damages associated with the “Tot Lot” which effectively restricted development but at a great cost to local residents.

Now city officials appropriately look to study the traffic and environmental implications of the Weiss Farm development. Surely we can expect a thoughtful, accurate, transparent, fair, and deliberate process that protects and respects the interests of the numerous parties involved. Critical thinking about the ‘other side of the trade’, using the best information available, understanding bias and limitation can help maintain our interests and quality of life in Melrose.