![]() Within innovation workshops, this can mean that decisions made can be loaded with personal agendas rather than customer and business logic for the company. This results in attributing positive events to oneself and conversely negative events as blame on oneself. Self-serving bias: favoring decisions that enhance self-esteem.This can be an issue when under time pressure in strict design sprint workshops for example. Team members can feel that they need to take action regardless of whether it is a good idea or not. Action bias: when faced with ambiguity (creative fuzzy-front-end) favoring doing something or anything without any prior analysis even if it is counterproductive: “I have to do something, even if I don’t know what to do”.what they do, leading to taking the wrong problems or needs forward to solve. This can occur within the Design Thinking empathize phase where you are intentionally seeking confirmation of causality between what people say vs. False causality bias: citing sequential events as evidence the first caused the second.To remedy this, the 11th commandment: “thou shalt not fall in love with thy solutions”. A consequence of effort, time and energy put into creative thinking, team members can become biased and become emotionally attached to their outcomes. We also attach more value to something once we have made an emotional investment in it. Loss-aversion bias: once a decision has been made, sticking to it rather than taking risks due to the fear of losing what you gained in starting something and wishing to see it finished.This means that innovative ideas coming from senior team members trump or better all others, even if other concepts, ideas, and inputs could be more creative and relevant to problem-solving. Authority bias: favoring authority figure opinions ideas within innovation teams.This can result in poor decision making and lead to groupthink which is particularly detrimental to creativity as outside opinions can become suppressed leading to self-censorship and loss of independent thought. Conformity bias: choices of mass populations influence how we think, even if against independent personal judgments.This results in looking for creative solutions that confirm our beliefs rather than challenge them, making us closed to new possibilities. Confirmation bias: we believe what we want to believe by favoring information that confirms preexisting beliefs or preconceptions.This can result in not best serving the interests of the firm, but in satisfying personal biases, sub-conscious egos and agendas. Not everyone experiences biases in the same way or extent, but some or a mixture of just a few can distort creative and critical thinking and optimal decision making. Including environment, organizational thinking routines, comfort zones and into the ‘adjacent possible’ where the unlocked and unrestricted creative magic really happens. Whereas we strive to do the opposite in our innovation consulting, by getting people outside of their day-to-day frames of reference. The underlying belief that you’ll be safer, more secure and more comfortable with less uncertainty and risk dominates decision making. Both types can have implications when assessing new potentially innovative concepts to further iterate and develop because they operate to keep you within your comfort zone of what is already de-risked and known. Emotional biases are much harder to change or fix as they are based on attitudes and feelings, consciously and unconsciously. Information processing biases are statistical, quantitative errors of judgment that are easy to fix with new information. Broadly speaking, cognitive biases can be split into two types: information processing and emotional biases. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |