Do we make biased decisions because we are obsessed with quantifying our decision analysis? Linda Chang, Erika Kirgios, Sendil Mullainathan, and Katherine Milkman have published an interesting new study titled, "Does counting change what counts? Quantification fixation biases decision-making." They asked the question: "Do people decide differently when some dimensions of a choice are quantified and others are not?"
The scholars conducted a series of experiments. Each decision that the research subjects encountered involved some tradeoffs. Some dimensions of the tradeoffs were described quantitatively and others qualitatively. The results of the experiments demonstrated that people tended to prefer the alternatives about which numerical data was offered, rather than qualitative information. Thea authors explain that, "This 'quantification fixation' is driven by the perception that numbers are easier to use for comparative decision-making."
The scholars argue that we face many decisions in business and in life in which some dimensions of the tradeoffs can be quantified, but others simply cannot. The qualitative information may be rich and useful though. The numbers may tell only a portion of the story. Think about a manager facing a decision about a brand extension. Numbers may be readily available demonstrating the potential for sales growth, market share increases, and profitability enhancement. On the other hand, the risks around brand dilution may be more readily described in qualitative fashion. Do managers pay less attention those very real brand dilution risks simply because they can't easily produce numbers about how dilution may arise and impact the business?
The scholars conclude, "Those who structure decision contexts ignore quantification fixation at their peril. As quantification becomes increasingly prevalent, people may be pulled away from valuable qualitative information toward potentially less diagnostic numeric information."
No comments:
Post a Comment