Avoiding Cognitive Biases in Managing Wicked Problem (Presentation Slides)

In: Proceedings of the 47th Northeastern Decision Sciences Institute (NEDSI) Annual Conference! April 12 -14, 2018. Providence, R.I.

38 Pages Posted: 4 May 2018

Date Written: April 12, 2018

Abstract

Technical issues simply require an answer, direction, or application of resources to solve a problem, which many leaders do in expediency to address conflict given the constant demands and issues they confront daily. On the other hand, wicked problems or adaptive challenges are typically grounded in the complexity of the values, beliefs, and loyalties rather than technical complexity and stir up intense emotions rather than dispassionate analysis (Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky, 2009). Wicked problems in organizations that confront managers are unstructured, and not only is it difficult to predict the outcomes of possible solutions with precision, but the ideal set of alternatives that should be considered prior to making a strategic choice is also often unclear. Addressing adaptive challenges requires a deeper understanding of people’s behaviors, motivations, loyalties, as well as organizational norms, attitudes, and processes to enact real and sustained change. This type of leadership and decision making cannot easily rely on past methods or actions. Instead, the leader must embrace the learning and risks that come with implementing tough changes that ultimately support the values and purposes of the individual and/or collective. Managers do not make flawed decisions simply because they lack intelligence, expertise, or the correct motivations/incentives. Most often than not technical solutions are used in decision-making for adaptive challenges (Kahneman, Lovallo, & Sibony, 2011). In cases where wicked problems are recognized and also acknowledged that technical solutions will only address the symptoms, managers still make poor choices because they encounter systematic traps that impair their judgment. These cognitive biases are rooted in nature and are artifacts of wicked problems and adaptive challenges. Managers find themselves vulnerable to these biases no matter how capable and intelligent they are. It is important to understand that everyone is vulnerable to cognitive biases. Intelligence, experience, and/or expertise in a particular field does not shield people from these decision traps. They are rooted in human nature. What techniques can we use to combat cognitive biases in addressing adaptive challenges? Ability to diagnose and recognize a wicked problem or adaptive challenge from a tame problem or a technical challenge is the critical first step, but recognizing an adaptive challenge alone will not prevent flawed choices because of cognitive biases (Yawson, 2015). Key cognitive biases include the confirmation bias, the sunk cost trap, the anchoring bias, and the framing bias. How can organizational leaders avoid these decision traps in addressing wicked problems? How can decision making on complex systems - the so called wicked problems or adaptive challenges - come to grips with irreducible, or deep, uncertainty without cognitive biases? This paper discusses, complex adaptive decision making in the context of four main cognitive biases: Confirmation Bias, Sunk Cost Trap, Anchoring Bias, and Framing Bias.

Keywords: Adaptive Challenges, Complex Systems, Cognitive Biases, Decision-Making, Functional Stupidity, Wicked Problems.

Suggested Citation

Yawson, Robert M., Avoiding Cognitive Biases in Managing Wicked Problem (Presentation Slides) (April 12, 2018). In: Proceedings of the 47th Northeastern Decision Sciences Institute (NEDSI) Annual Conference! April 12 -14, 2018. Providence, R.I., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3164464

Robert M. Yawson (Contact Author)

Quinnipiac University ( email )

275 Mt. Carmel Avenue, SB-DNF
School of Business
Hamden, CT 06518
United States
2035825023 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.qu.edu/faculty-and-staff/robert-yawson/

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
101
Abstract Views
618
Rank
476,311
PlumX Metrics