Good decision-makers know the only way to never make a wrong one is to never make any, so they don’t fear being wrong occasionally. They also know that although they can’t completely control the results of their decisions, they can completely control the process; and there is a definite decision-making process.
The most important part of the process is to wait until emotions are in neutral before taking any action. Decisions made when we are highly emotional --be it enthusiasm, anger, sorrow, humiliation, or whatever — often turn out to be completely inappropriate. Here are some pertinent examples:
1) Enthusiasm: Becoming enamoured with a house and immediately buying it without a professional inspection or giving enough consideration to future requirements. Then, when it turned out to be an impractical residence needing considerable expensive work, selling it at a loss and having to move again.
2) Anger: More bad decisions are made in anger than any other emotion, such as Toronto Maple Leaf forward Jason Spezza losing his temper in last Sunday’s game against the Winnipeg Jets, which led to him kneeing Jet defenceman Neil Pionk in the head as revenge for a dirty hit by Pionk on Rasmus Sandin. Spezza’s six-game suspension is testimony to just how angrily addled his decision was. In almost 1,300 previous NHL games Spezza hadn’t even been fined, let alone suspended.
3) Sorrow: A recently widowed woman selling her house and moving to another city, far from family and friends, only to move back after a year of loneliness and unhappiness.
4) Humiliation: A rising young executive quitting a good job (without giving the required notice, which resulted in no letter of recommendation) because his boss made a disparaging joke about his background at an office party. It took the young man many months to get his career back on track.
The second most important step in the decision-making process is to gather as much information as possible before reaching a final conclusion. Bad information leads to bad decisions. An important step in getting the right information is asking questions. I’ve rarely regretted asking questions, but there’ve been times when I’ve regretted not asking them. Because ignoring facts doesn’t change them, it’s important to be objective while gathering information. It’s not what we would like a situation to be that matters; it’s what the situation actually is that counts. Reality has to be faced.
The best formula for gathering information I’ve come across is this five-step process that was part of the Dale Carnegie Course when I took it:
State the problem as clearly as possible.
List all causes of the problem.
List every possible solution.
Pick the best possible solution.
Decide what action to take.
Facts have to be distinguished from opinions and more weight given to facts. Also, facts are like stories; they need a context. Information should be carefully examined to determine its relevance in the context of the problem. It’s rare for two situations to be identical; but if they are, it’s important to determine what the outcome of the previous decision was.
Another issue to be faced is timing. It's important to avoid the two extremes: impulsive action and unwarranted delay. Quick decisions are fraught with danger. When being pressured into making a quick decision, the answer should always be “no.” It’s usually easier to change a “no” to a “yes” than vice versa. But indecision isn’t desirable either. When considering the consequences of an action, always factor in the consequences of inaction. Delays caused by indecision often create additional problems. For example, if too much time is spent considering a plan B, the best opportunity to successfully execute the preferred action may pass.
Don’t over-complicate the process. Simple solutions may have to be discarded, but they should always be considered first. When instinct and logic both suggest the same solution, it’s probably the right one.
The final step is to decide whether the decision should be discussed with anyone before implementing it. This step could well have avoided three of the four unfortunate decisions described above.