Stop

making

bad

decisions

during

meetings!

By

Frédéric

Donck

The goal of the conference was to encourage participants to rethink how they make professional decisions.

By exploring the fascinating intricacies of neuroscience, participants discovered that our brain, the seat of our choices, is inherently lazy and relies on mental shortcuts and desires for rewards and pleasure to make most decisions automatically. Also, they learned that intuitions, often glorified, are actually quite unreliable advisors.

Regarding intuition, you may have heard that leaders of major companies often claim that their critical decisions are guided by intuition. However, when we examine intuition through the lens of neuroscience, its image changes dramatically. Rather than being a glamorous, mystical ability, intuition is more about recognizing previously experienced situations—a much more practical process.Essentially, intuition might simply be the recognition of familiar patterns. In situations where our intuition seems to play a role, there is often a prior cue that triggers a recall of stored information, providing us with an answer.

Consider the well-known story of a U.S. fire captain who evacuated his team just before a burning building collapsed. According to neuroscience experts, it wasn’t purely intuition, but a perception of anomalies based on past experiences with similar fires. So, should we dismiss intuition? Not at all! We can trust our intuition under certain conditions: significant experience in the relevant field and numerous cases with immediate and precise feedback are key.

In short, the doctor who has examined thousands of patients, the engineer who has built numerous bridges, or the high-level athlete who has worn out countless pairs of shoes on the field—these individuals can rely on their intuition. However, if you are an entrepreneur developing a new product or an investor entering a new market, caution is advised: nothing replaces solid market research!

What about the roles of emotions, particularly our mood, in our decision-making process?

At work, being in a good mood is often linked to a harmonious atmosphere and increased productivity.

When we're happy, our brain releases neurotransmitters like dopamine and serotonin, which enhance creativity and divergent thinking. A good mood also allows us to step back and see situations more broadly. This seems advantageous, right? Not entirely. Being in a good mood can also reduce our vigilance. In this state, the brain spends less energy detecting and critically analyzing potential threats.

On the other hand, when we're a bit depressed or simply in a bad mood, our brain becomes more convinced that things are not going well, which triggers increased vigilance. This heightened awareness makes us more alert to potential threats. So, counterintuitive as it may seem, if your goal is to review a crucial document like a housing lease or a life insurance contract, especially if it involves significant financial decisions, it might be better to do so when you're in a bad mood—and perhaps isolated in your office!

Cognitive biases have a monumental influence on our decision-making because they provide us with automatic yet unconscious responses.

One significant bias is the anchoring effect, where we tend to rely heavily on the first piece of information we receive (the anchor) when making decisions. This bias is remarkable because the initial information we encounter strongly influences all our subsequent judgments and decisions, even when additional information is available later. The anchoring effect appears in many areas, including judicial decisions, economic evaluations, and interpersonal assessments.

A classic example of the anchoring effect occurs in economic or financial negotiations. When buying an apartment, the first one you visit often becomes the reference point for evaluating all others. This phenomenon is also evident in how we assess the price of a good based on the initial prices suggested, even if those prices are arbitrary or baseless. The anchoring effect also influences our perception of a product’s value. For instance, a coat initially priced high and then sold at a discount seems like a better deal than a similar item never displayed at a high price, even if both products are ultimately sold for the same amount. If you want to dig in deeper in this subject, we strongly advice you to check out Frédérick Donk's website.