Today we were doing an excellent brunch with two friends, and suddenly I had the blog topic for this week.
At the same time I remembered a great ... really GREAT professor of Decision Theory at the Faculty of Economics at the University of Buenos Aires, the EEC at the University of Sant Andrew and the University of CEMA: Ernesto Weissmann, who is also the Director Tandem Solutions, Decision, and co-author of "The Decision", edited by Norma, Kapelusz.
Ernesto always taught that when you have to decide quickly, no time to search and analyze data. In these cases, the decision will leave the "stomach". Although this also means greater risk of error.
So how do you know when we need further analysis? When can we rely on intuition?. For that reason I venture to recall a note of it in my blog. And I want to share with you this Sunday night:
"In situations of uncertainty, the tendency to action is often used to justify the power of intuition or even the lack of analysis of decisions which, by their complexity, require.
The culture of "issues drawn up" works, often as an excuse to skip the early stages of the decision process and doomed himself to the details of execution.
So often extols the value of intuition over analysis, even when the analytical capacity that people may use today is huge and provides many advantages.
It is generally believed that if a decision is the product of "stomach" has more merit than if it was intended. We applaud the waiter who remembers our order memory, instead of applauding the scoring and never wrong.
In recent years, more intuitive approach has had its main exponent in Malcolm Gladwell, author of "Blink." Those who proclaim that the analysis is crucial for success, they have found Thomas Davenport, author of "Competing on Analytics."
However, not all decisions can be made using a method nor in a blink.
From the time of Platón, the discussion on "reason and emotion," "intuition or deduction," or even "action versus reflection" has established itself as opposing axes, but have increasingly come to be thought of as complementary rather than competitive approaches.
Two systems of thought:
The psychologist Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Laureate in Economics 2002, explains that there are two systems of thought.
The first is fast and automatic. This system comes into operation, for example, when calculating the distance between two objects while walking, or when we recognize that someone is angry just by looking at your face with a frown. This mode of thinking is very fast and we have no control over it. It is simply something that happens.
Intuition draws on this non-conscious system of thought that is the result of experience or repetition.
Through it, we can "know" even without knowing how we know (this can sometimes be a problem when trying to explain how we arrived at our conclusions).
This system of thought we can win a lot of time and is very useful for many decisions. As we gain experience, we use it in a wider variety of situations where speed is crucial.
However, the many mistakes that we can fall relying solely on our intuition make only the most experienced can have the confidence to make these decisions without foundation that dictates the "cuore", "stomach", "belly "and other body parts (minus the head).
In this way, intuition is no longer a "sixth sense", but is reserved for those who have acquired knowledge of having lived many of the same decision situations.
Following Kahneman, a second system of thought that is slower and allows reasoned but we manage.
For example, if we calculate how much is 54 x 12 need to go to it. Made a decision to "voluntarily" to a mathematical exercise to get the answer. Many of the choices that we have to take in changing environments require that "decide" to evaluate them.
However, the "culture of action" to which we referred to above often makes it undervalues the use of more consistent approaches or methodologies including decision making, of course, never suffer distractions, fatigue, boredom, or anger.
In fact, if for a moment, we left our lives in the hands of another person, would we want to display "dynamic", the decisions quickly without having studied its possible consequences?
A system connected to the other:
Intuition can help in the decisions of our lives. But we can not blindly trust it. We need the second manages the system of thought first.
People can not stop the hunches influence their judgments, they appear when faced with a decision without being called. What they can do is to identify situations where more likely to be biased, and strengthen the decision process to reduce risk.
To choose when to rely on intuition, need to understand what kind of decision we face and what is the impact of their possible consequences.
In a recent McKinsey article on intuition, the authors recommend that Campbell and Whitehead, before deciding intuitively perform four testing:
1-Familiarity: Do we have experience often identical or similar situations?
If we have a sufficient number of appropriate situations to evaluate, our opinion is more likely to be appropriate. The chess masters are played in less than six seconds thanks to its experience in similar situations.
The hardest thing is to understand whether the experience is "appropriate", which is related to the uncertainties or risks are similar. You need to think "why this could go wrong" -
2-Feedback: Is it reliable feedback that we receive in similar situations?
Past experience is only good if we learn the right lessons. And, to learn, practice well, you need the feedback on the success and failure is immediate and unequivocal.
If the feedback is delayed or is ambiguous, learning vanishes and we can not use the experience for us. If we always receive positive feedback, then neither will help.
3-Measuring emotions: Were Measured emotions we experience in similar or related situations?
Our brain categorizes experiences with emotional labels and these are the first that appear intuitively to think a decision. If these charges are very strong, the balance will tip very quickly.
Knowing from personal experience, that dogs can bite is different from a childhood trauma of bad experiences with dogs.
The first will help us to interact with dogs. The second might make us fear even the most friendly puppy.
4-Independence: We tend to be influenced by personal interests?
If we had to decide between two locations for our next office and one of them was better from a personal standpoint, be careful.
Our subconscious will have more positive emotions for the location is best for us, regardless of rational analysis that can be done about the advantages and disadvantages for the organization.
If the situation fails in any of these testings, we know that we need to strengthen the decision process to avoid the risk of undesirable results.
In short, the intuition can help us save time in some decisions. But the risk involved for any error of interpretation, analysis and estimation, is high.
Similarly, also the risks of not perceiving that our capacity is limited and that our judgments are influenced, for example, your mood or even fatigue.
Choosing the best method will be critical to make decisions at full speed while we ensure that those decisions lead us in the right destination and the best we can get.
As usual I hope your comments on my blog, and know your views on the intuition and the impact on your lives".
A big hug and a good beginning of the week for you all!
Lorena
