3 Steps for Unbiased Decision Making in Project Management

So, you want your project team to think rationally and make good decisions. Good luck!

The challenge is that there are 200 known biases and distortions involved in decision making that cause people to think and act irrationally. (Dvorsky, 2013) (Lubin & Lebowitz, 2015) (Wikipedia, 2018)

Here are a few of which you may be familiar: 

• Belief Bias: An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion (Klauer, Musch, & Naumer, 2000)
• Distinction Bias: The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately (Hsee & Zhang, 2004)
• Information Bias: The tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action (Baron, 1994)
• False Consensus Effect: The tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them (Marks & Miller, 1987)
• Shared Information Bias: Known as the tendency for group members to spend more time and energy discussing information of which all members are already familiar (i.e., shared information), and less time and energy discussing information of which only some members are aware (i.e., unshared information) (Forsyth, 2009)
• Illusion of Truth Effect: That people are more likely to identify as true statements those they have previously heard (even if they cannot consciously remember having heard them), regardless of the actual validity of the statement. In other words, a person is more likely to believe a familiar statement than an unfamiliar one. (Fazio, Brashier, Payne, & Marsh, 2015)

Although some groups have shared biases, each individual exercises a different set of biases. This is particularly challenging for the project manager. It is the task of the project manager to reduce the impact of biases on an individual level before the group can be moved to a decision. The larger the group involved with the decision making the more daunting the task of overcoming biases. 

The good news is that the task does not need to be overwhelming. There are three basic steps we can follow to help us get to a decision that is as free from bias as possible. 

Step 1: Transparency – Identify and Overcome

One good first step is to be totally transparent by directly acknowledging and addressing biases.

Mike Pinder helps us out here.  He is a consultant with Board of Innovation. In one of his articles he outlines 16 biases that can kill decision making and three de-biasing steps that can be taken to help minimize bias effects:  (Pinder, 2017)

1. Spot the biases. Be clear about the facts and identify specific biases affecting you or your team as they become apparent. List each one and display them to the team. But don’t make it personal.
2. Know and conquer your enemy. Reflect upon and challenge each identified bias. Openly discuss the impact of each on the current situation.
3. Overcome. Flip, reverse, and remove biases by asking question that have a reciprocal effect.  For instance:
1. What if the bias did not exist at this moment?
2. Compare and contrast the position of those without the bias; acknowledge the validity of the opposing position.
3. What if the opposite of this bias were true? How possible is it that the opposite of the bias is true?
4. How does/could the decision change in light of this new awareness?

Step 2. Choose and Exercise a Method

So far the team is only exploring the options and acknowledging potential biases. The team may have gone as far as neutralizing biases to some degree. Now the team can move on to the actual decision making. Common methods can be used: 

• Command: the leader makes the decision without any further involvement from the team. This has the highest risk because it leaves the biases of the leader unchecked and potentially in play, but it takes the shortest amount of time. 
• Consult: the leader allows input from team members before making the decision. This helps reduce risk because it exposes biases for consideration, but it might take a little longer.
• Vote: all options are discussed for a short period and then there is a call for a vote. Because everyone has a say in the decision and biases can be more directly challenged it will reduce risk, but the decision won’t be as timely.
• Consensus: the entire group discusses all options until everyone agrees on the decision. This has the lowest associated risk because it gives the greatest opportunity to de-bias the decision, but it may take exceptionally long to arrive at a decision.

Of course, there are tools that can be used in this process such as market research, decision matrix, cost-benefit analysis, pros/cons chart, SWOT analysis, and the like. Incorporate any tool or set of tools that are most appropriate and understood by the team. The key here is to use tools that are familiar and can be referenced without reserve by team members, to include the sponsor. If an unfamiliar tool is used, be sure to fully educate the audience on its use and application.

Step 3. Communicate the Decision

After the decision process is complete the simplest step is often overlooked – let everyone know. People frequently come and go throughout the decision making process and are often left wondering what the final decision was. So, let everyone know with a brief summary of the reasoning. The organization will dictate how specific this needs to be. 

Decision making without biases of significant impact is possible. Although it requires a focused and committed effort, the process can be rewarding and lead to project and organizational success stories.

Seriously, good luck! 

Bibliography

Baron, J. (1994). Thinking and deciding (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Dvorsky, G. (2013, Janurary 9). The 12 cognitive biases that prevent you from being rational.

Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N. M., Payne, B. K., & Marsh, E. J. (2015). Knowledge Does Not Protect Against Illusory Truth. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 993-1002.

Forsyth, D. R. (2009). Group Dynamics (5th ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. (2004). Distinction bias: Misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 680–695.

Klauer, K., Musch, J., & Naumer, B. (2000). On belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. Psychological Review, 852–884.

Lubin, G., & Lebowitz, S. (2015, October 29). 58 cognitive biases that screw up everything we do. Business Insider.

Marks, G., & Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, pp. 72–90.

Pinder, M. (2017, August 2). 16 cognitive biases that can kill your decision making.

Wikipedia. (2018). List of cognitive biases.