Associative Processes in Intuitive Judgment
Essay Preview: Associative Processes in Intuitive Judgment
Report this essay
Sample quotes from management:
“We need to avoid analysis paralysis.”
“Without doing the formal cost-benefit analysis, we need to discount the product.”
“I say we walk from the deal. Its a lose-lose situation.”
“How quickly can you back pedal if youre wrong?”
Having gained more clinical insight into the dual system decision making process from our readings and lecture, I am not only convinced that “experience” is paramount to the role of an executive, but also as a musician.
Given the restraints of time and budget, innate management decision making is based on experience. Experience, in this case, refers an adaptive heuristic developed over time via many situations. Where an initial instinct or reaction has been amended, tempered and tested through trials and errors so that the bias can be called upon with confidence. Sometimes referred to as an instinct, the adaptive heuristic can quickly weigh many variables present in a specific situation to make an informed decision. The weighing of the complexity, and quantity, of these variables, at the moment of decision making, calibrates and improves (adapts) through experience. Obfuscating the efficacy of the decision with actually being right (or eventually be considered correct) can, in this context, be moot. But unfortunately, a wrong decision can be costly as can a correct one can be rewarded. More significantly are the corollaries of an adaptive assessment from a business executive to a musician, especially with consideration to the external variables where instinctive reaction is imperative.
The dual systems theory of cognitive psychology referenced in Morewedge and Kahnemans article defines System 1 as “the automatic operations of associative memory.” Furthermore, they allude that System 2, originally thought of as the analytical and corrective component to System 1, might correctly or incorrectly influence a System 1 judgment. And that System 1, on its own, can make a better decision or inference. As I recall, with little experience to call upon, when I was a new manager, I often questioned and did not trust my instincts. I, as often as possible, would chose to delay decision making until further analysis can be performed and other opinions can be weighed. In time, I was able to identify the similarities of a situation and quickly make a decision based on experience. This simplistic, yet evolved model is the tool or process by which managers will eventually balance the time and expense needed in order to make a decision. Hence, a new or complex situation will result in the use of System 2, i.e., more contemplation, time and expense.
This model for decision making is learned and practiced through repetition.