Choices, Choices,
Everywhere…
Not once
have I stopped to consider the total number of decisions I make on a daily or
weekly basis. Although I take many quizzes during the course of completing
degree work, the vast majority of those tests do not formally test my decision
making style; yet, perhaps in some manner they do. A quiz, offered by
ChopraCenter (2012) and based on eight simple questions, provides the student
with insight as to his or her decision-making style. These questions focus on choices
that require time spent researching, choices that make us fret, choices that
are second guessed, choices that freeze our ability to decide, choices that
make us procrastinate, choices made by emotional input alone, choices that
others will question, choices that avoid risk, and choices repeated in
incorrect ways (ChopraCenter, 2012). The results of my quiz summarize a mastery
level of decision making capabilities. According to the quiz, I am able to make
decisions “without agonizing over difficult choices or choosing impulsively”
(ChopraCenter, 2012). With all of the choices presented on a daily basis, how
does one achieve this level?
I have
often heard variety is the spice of life. As Hoch, Kunreuther, and Gunther
(2001) observe folks like to frequently change their consumption patterns; and,
this propensity for change leads to many decision making processes by managers
and others that not only allow for the variety; but, provide a mechanism whereby
the decision maker does not make “suboptimal” choices simply for the sake of
variety” (p. 65). The reasons why variety is sought includes relieving boredom,
assuring consumers “get everything they need” by choosing more than one option,
and trying various options helps us learn to adapt to a changing environment
(Hoch et al., 2001, p. 67). Hoch et al. (2001) consider the added costs that
come with offering more variety. They, along with Sheena Iyengar, as evidenced
by her presentation at TEDSalonNY2011 (2011), also understand consumers can
become “frustrated or confused” by that which Iyengar terms as “choice overload
problem” (Hoch et al., 2001, p. 65). In his presentation before TEDGlobal
(2005), Dan Gilbert explains we experience difficulties in making good
decisions as we have trouble with estimating odds and values. Based on Iyengar’s
research, it is the model of multiple choices that causes the overload; and,
perhaps this partly explains our difficulty with calculating odds and values
(TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). Iyengar also reports the results of a study she
conducted which indicate half of the numerous decisions mangers make are
completed within nine minutes or less and only twelve percent of decisions
required one hour or more (TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). Choice overload can lead to a
delay in choosing, poorer choices, and choices that leave us less satisfied
(TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). Fortunately, there are four tools decision makers can
become aware of and use in order to improve their decision making process and
ultimately their choices.
Iyengar
outlines the importance of the four Cs in overcoming choice overload
(TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). Cut, which follows the principle “less is more”, can
result in increased sales, reduced costs, and an improvement of the choosing
experience (TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). Concretization helps a consumer to
understand the consequences of choices in a vivid and concrete manner.
Categorization helps us tell choices apart and we have the ability to process
more categories than choices. The final “C”, conditioning for complexity,
starts consumers off with fewer choices and gradually increases the number of
choices so that consumers can learn to choose, not become overloaded, and avoid
the negative consequences of choosing for the sake of choosing (TEDSalonNY2011,
2011). According to Iyengar, the average person makes 70 choices a day, 25,550
choices annually (TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). If I begin my adult decision-making
process at age eighteen, then I have made at least 945,350 choices. Of the four
methodologies discussed by Iyengar, I have benefited from and improved my
decision making style by incorporating cut and categorization.
I well
remember having only three, sometimes four, television channels from which to
choose. We did not pay to receive the channels. A well-positioned television
antenna that sometimes needed to be turned provided many memorable nights of
quality television programs. The excitement and choices that came with the
introduction of cable television was incredible; given we now had to pay for
television programming; and, at first, the variety was welcomed. Instead of a television
with a manual channel selection knob, a sleek white box with a sliding channel
selector, that ran the gambit from 2 to 42, sat atop the television and opened
the windows to a plethora of viewing choices. Unfortunately, as Hoch et al.
(2001) note, the special programming offered by HBO lost its appeal of variety as airings became redundant and
something once considered special simply became regular. The next choice was
that of either satellite or enhanced cable through options like AT&T
U-verse. As the choices, delivery options, and resolutions increased; so, too
did the cost. As Iyengar predicts, at least in my experience, my engagement and
satisfaction with television programming have decreased and many times I simply
select a channel for the sake of having background noise for studying
(TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). At one time, I had over five hundred channels. Today, I
have the lowest package offered; and, even then I find myself scrolling down
the channel guide in search of quality programs. Today, it seems as if there
are more info stations than regular viewing stations and more often than not
re-runs fill the airwaves. Rather than become frustrated, I quickly scan my
favorite stations and choose a program from that list. It saves me time. I do
not second guess. I do not fret. I am not paralyzed as I can find something to
watch. There are not questions from others and even if I choose a re-run, at
least the decision is a good one. The second “C” I use on a consistent basis is
categorization.
As Hoch et
al. (2001) state, it is crucial for decision makers to easily find the choice
that best suits their need. Categorization, as explained by Iyengar, helps the
chooser to distinguish among the vast array of choices (TEDSalonNY2011, 2011). One
of my favorite stores is the Goodwill Store. There are many choices; however,
the simple categories of men’s, women’s, and children’s clothing further
categorized by blouses, pants, skirts, dresses, jeans, and separated by colors
and sizes help me to focus on the particular article of clothing I might be
seeking. This also saves me time as I do not have waste time looking at each
tag, nor, do I waste time by looking for a blouse in the skirt aisle. Since the
clothes hanging on the racks are all Goodwill has in stock, I do not fret about
a size or color not being available. Rarely does anyone know if I am wearing
clothing from Goodwill, so the need to worry about what others will say or
think is drastically reduced. The variety is amazing; and, the best part of
this decision making process is I realize savings while re-purposing clothing.
Iyengar’s
four Cs fit nicely with my decision making style; however, neither the style
nor the techniques are acquired overnight. Decision making, like any skill,
requires practice and that comes with making more decisions. The more we
practice our craft, the less we agonize or choose impulsively. We soon learn
that fewer channels were much easier to navigate from and select a quality
program. We also recognize that designer labels can be had for fractions of the
cost by focusing our decisions in a categorized manner. “Variety truly is the
spice-of-life”; but, choices, choices, everywhere do not need to lead to choice
overload (Hoch et al., 2001, p. 76).
References
ChopraCenter. (2012). Is Your
Decision-Making Style Holding You Back? Quibblo
Adknowledge EN, Inc. Retrieved
from http://www.quibblo.com/quiz/bywpzuF/Is-Your- Decision-Making-Style-Holding-You-Back
Hoch, S.J., Kunreuther, H.C.,
& Gunther, R.E. (2001). Wharton on
Making Decisions.
Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
TEDGlobal. (2005). Dan Gilbert:
Why we make bad decisions. [Video file]. Retrieved from
TEDSalonNY2011.
(2011, Nov.). Sheena Iyengar: How to make choosing easier. [Video file].
No comments:
Post a Comment