When decision-making is reduced to an algorithm, formula, or procedure, the risk of blame is minimised, essentially, the system says 'no.' People tend to favour codifying processes, making them numerical, and turning them into optimisation problems with one 'right' answer. However, this approach narrows the range of potential solutions, leaving little room for debate or alternatives. I think the burden of this rigid approach often falls more heavily on the recipient than on the sender.
Risk vs. yield
Why do we need data, facts and proof before we trust our intuition?
We have been educated to not trust our internal judgement and to seek external validation via data, facts and proof. I think this preference stems from a fear of responsibility for decisions, a desire for social validation, and an aversion to the perceived risks and biases associated with intuition. I hope that in the future we will move awaty from the command and control scenario towards trust and inspiration culture where diverse thought is celebrated in the decision-making process.
““To learn and not to do is really not to learn. To know and not to do is really not to know.””
Responding with dignity
I recently attended a leadership lecture at Copenhagen University, and said, "You cannot have imagination free decision making" as it suggests that decision-making and imagination are not independent of each other. I think imagination often plays a role in decision-making, as it allows individuals to envision different scenarios, possibilities, and outcomes related to a decision. However, it's important to note that while imagination can influence decision-making, individuals still have the capacity to make decisions that are not solely dictated by their imagination. The lecturer pushed back with “Decision-making can also be guided by rationality, logic, past experiences, and external factors, depending on the context and the specific decision at hand. So, while imagination can be a valuable tool in the decision-making process, it does not necessarily restrict or eliminate the possibility of free decision-making.” I guess we were both right…
Don't glorify the past
Image c/o The New York Times
The concept of 'the data will tell you what to do' is an appealing notion to many individuals. We all know the old adage, “Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM”, as the IBM products and services was the safe and conservative choice for companies and organisations. Making decisions based solely on objective information without subjective judgment or imagination may shield one from blame or potential consequences if things go wrong. All big data comes from the same place - the past! Therefore, if you rely excessively on historical data this can lead to dangerous future for yourself. Although this approach may work in the short term when tomorrow resembles yesterday, it becomes highly risky in the long term, especially when significant disruptions occur.
Was it worth it?
Have you considered the long-term consequences and benefits of your actions?
Yes, I engage in deliberate decision-making practices and make conscious choices about how I spend my time. If I was to offer you some advice, then it would be to prioritise activities that contribute to your personal growth, focus on meaningful relationships and the pursuit of your goals. Instead of chasing material wealth and possessions, I think it more beneficial to broaden your horizons and seek out experiences as they will provide a sense of fulfilment and contribute to more meaningful life.