Very few people have learned how to make good decisions. Yet the ability to consciously find optimal decisions makes people happier in life. In the Standard, I explain how people can train themselves to make better decisions and, as a result, be more satisfied with their lives.
Being self-determined means constantly making your own decisions. As we all know, these are not always the right ones. Afterwards, one is usually smarter, but then also often more frustrated, because what was actually planned did not occur. Johannes Siebert from the Management Center Innsbruck (MCI) and his team have proven this connection in several empirical studies: “We have shown in a structural equation model that those who have higher proactive cognitive abilities for decision-making are subsequently more satisfied with their lives,” Siebert reports. Such skills, which are necessary for making wise decisions in private life or at work, can be improved through appropriate training….
The full article by Johannes Lau can be found here.
References
Siebert, Johannes U., Becker, Maxi; Oeser, Nadine. “Making the right career choice: A new educational tool to train decision-making proactivity in high school students” (Decision Sciences Journal for Innovative Education), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dsji.12280
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity”, European Journal of Operational Research, 294 (1) 2021, 264-282 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.010
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of Proactive Decision Making on Life Satisfaction”, European Journal of Operational Research, 280(1) 2020, 1171-1187, doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.08.0111
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard. “Developing and Validating the Multidimensional Proactive Decision-Making Scale”. Special Issue „Behavioral Operations Research“ in European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3) 2016, 864-877.dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.06.066
Can we learn to make decisions in such a way that they positively influence developments in our private lives or in companies in the long term? Only if the character traits are right, says research.
“A large proportion of companies make extremely poor decisions because they are unable to identify their objectives,” explains Johannes Siebert of Management Center Innsbruck (MCI). Only if the company’s objectives and values were defined could they be systematically pursued. If this does not happen, clinging to the status quo reigns instead of proactively initiating change. According to Siebert, making the right decisions is also the basis for entrepreneurial success.
In Die Presse, I explain how people can make decisions and subsequently be more satisfied with their lives. Just follow this link.
Sources
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity”, European Journal of Operational Research, 294 (1) 2021, 264-282 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.010
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of Proactive Decision Making on Life Satisfaction”, European Journal of Operational Research, 280(1) 2020, 1171-1187, doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.08.0111
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard. “Developing and Validating the Multidimensional Proactive Decision-Making Scale”. Special Issue „Behavioral Operations Research“ in European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3) 2016, 864-877.dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.06.066
Decision sciences are in general agreement on the theoretical relevance of decision training. From an empirical standpoint, however, only a few studies test its effectiveness or practical usefulness, and even less address the impact of decision training on the structuring of problems systematically. Yet that task is widely considered to be the most crucial in decision-making processes, and current research suggests that effectively structuring problems and generating alternatives—as epitomized by the concept of proactive decision making—increases satisfaction with the decision as well as life satisfaction more generally.
This paper empirically tests the effect of decision training on two facets of proactive decision making—cognitive skills and personality traits—and on decision satisfaction. In quasi-experimental field studies based on three distinct decision-making courses and two control groups, we analyze longitudinal data on 1,013 decision makers/analysts with different levels of experience. The results reveal positive training effects on proactive cognitive skills and decision satisfaction, but we find no effect on proactive personality traits and mostly non-significant interactions between training and experience. These results imply the practical relevance of decision training as a means to promote effective decision making even by more experienced decision makers.
The findings presented here may be helpful for operations research scholars who advocate for specific instruction concerning proactive cognitive skills in courses dedicated to decision quality and/or decision theory and also for increasing, in such courses, participants’ proactive decision making and decision satisfaction. Our results should also promote more positive decision outcomes.
Veröffentlichung Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity”, European Journal of Operational Research, 294 (1) 2021, 264-282, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.010
The crucial research questions are how their proactivity in decision situations can characterize individuals, the eventual consequences of proactivity in decision situations, and how the degree of proactivity affects satisfaction with one’s decisions. The scale on Proactive Decision Making (PDM) that has been theoretically developed from literature and empirically validated in cooperation with Prof. Reinhard Kunz (University of Cologne) allows for describing the degree of proactivity of individuals with six dimensions. Two dimensions cover proactive personality traits: ‘striving for improvement’ and ‘showing initiative’. The four dimensions ‘systematical identification of objectives’, ‘systematical identification of information’, ‘systematical identification of alternatives’, and “using a ‘decision radar’ concern proactive cognitive skills and integrate the ideas and concepts of value-focused thinking and decision quality into the PDM-scale.
This scale provides the basis for analyzing many research questions. For instance, proactive individuals are significantly more satisfied with their decisions, and the scale can explain up to 50% of the variance of decision satisfaction. In another study, the scale was used a priori and ex-post to analyze the impact of an online course on decision-making on the participants. In line with hypotheses derived from literature, the degree of the proactive personality traits remains stable while the degree of the proactive cognitive skills improved through the training significantly. Furthermore, we were able to link proactive cognitive skills to life satisfaction. Scholars who teach courses on decision-making can use these results to claim the relevance and impact of their courses.
Siebert, Johannes U.; Kunz, Reinhard, Rolf, Philipp. “Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity”, European Journal of Operational Research, 294 (1) 2021, 264-282,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.010
Johannes Ulrich Siebert, Reinhard E. Kunz, Philipp Rolf. Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity. European Journal of Operational Research (2021), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.010
Johannes Ulrich Siebert, Reinhard E. Kunz, Philipp Rolf: Effects of proactive decision making on life satisfaction. European Journal of Operational Research (2020), 280, 1171-1187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.08.011[JS1]
People who make smart decisions in important private and professional matters increase their chances of greater life satisfaction. The cognitive skills required for this can be significantly honed through training. This is the conclusion reached by researchers at the University of Bayreuth in recent empirical studies published in the European Journal of Operational Research. Courses lasting several weeks with participants of different age and occupational groups demonstrably strengthened their ability to make well-considered choices in difficult decision-making situations.
When cognitive skills that produce proactive, wise decision-making behaviour are too weak, wrong decisions are made, or more precisely, suboptimal courses of action are chosen. Not infrequently, this permanently impairs quality of life and life satisfaction. However, training courses that include both basic knowledge and practical exercises can significantly improve decision-making behaviour – precisely by strengthening cognitive skills. These include, above all, the cognitive skills to approach decision-making situations proactively and with foresight, to gain clarity about one’s own goals, to identify promising options, and to make the best possible choice by weighing them carefully. This is what a research team at the University of Bayreuth has discovered over several years of work. PD Dr. Johannes Siebert, Philipp Rolf, and former Junior Professor Dr. Reinhard Kunz, who now holds a professorship at the University of Cologne, were involved.
Training, however, cannot change personality traits, which – in addition to cognitive skills – also have a significant influence on decision-making behaviour. “Dispositions that are effective in the long term, such as striving for self-optimization or an attitude toward life that takes initiative, obviously cannot be formed within a few weeks or months as a result of training courses,” explains Siebert, who completed his habilitation in Bayreuth and is currently researching and teaching at the Management Center Innsbruck.
In a previous study, the Bayreuth researchers were able to demonstrate that smart, proactive decision-making behaviour can significantly promote life satisfaction. The decisive factor here is not only the skill to prudently evaluate and weigh up given options for action, but also the skill to independently discover further options or even create new ones. “Our studies clearly show that the extent to which we are satisfied with our lives by no means depends solely on circumstances outside our control. Proactive decision-making behaviour helps us to open up new and better options for action and thereby strengthens our own quality of life. Because we can specifically train the skills required for this, it is in our own hands whether we develop into satisfied people or not,” says Philipp Rolf, Research Associate at the Production Management & Industrial Management research group at the University of Bayreuth.
The new findings on strengthening the cognitive characteristics that are important for good decision-making emerged from the scientific monitoring and evaluation of three courses that lasted several weeks. An online course on the quality of decisions was conducted in cooperation with a renowned U.S. university, a lecture on decision theory was held at a technical university in Germany, and courses at the Management Center Innsbruck in Austria focused on the systematic structuring and solving of decision-making situations. The more than 1,000 participants in total belonged to different age and professional groups, and thus represented a broad social spectrum. “All three courses demonstrably strengthened participants’ ability to reach the right decisions through proactive and smart thinking – regardless of their age, gender, or occupation,” says Siebert.
“KLUG entscheiden!” (deciding smart): A school project in Upper Franconia
The results of the two studies will also be incorporated into the “KLUG entscheiden!” school project, which was launched three years ago in Upper Franconia and the Upper Palatinate. In workshops, numerous students have already been guided to making well-founded and far-sighted decisions in selecting an apprenticeship or a course of study after leaving school. In addition, teachers have been familiarized with the basics of decision theory and instructed in how to integrate the content developed in the project into their teaching. At the same time, the project addresses the question of how schools can promote such decision-making behaviour. “Initial results show that students can train their decision-making skills and subsequently approach their career choice decisions more confidently. This results in very interesting new starting points for supporting young people,” Siebert sums up. The project is financially supported by the Rainer Markgraf Foundation, the Adalbert-Raps-Foundation, and the Upper Franconia Foundation, and will be continued until the end of 2021 in collaboration with the University of Bayreuth.
Source: „Learning to decide wisely and becoming happy: Studies show the effect of training on decision-making behaviour“, Media release of the University of Bayreuth 020/2021 (link, link) 15th of February
The first decision many young people make is “what do I do after school?” For the most part, different options are presented at best. Often, young people then choose one of the obvious alternatives or alternatives suggested by others without thinking more deeply about what they personally actually want and what their objectives are. For example, you often hear young people say, “My mother is a doctor, so I’m studying medicine,” or “My father is an entrepreneur. I’m studying business,” or even “My parents didn’t study. I should definitely not make the same mistake.” In principle, these decisions may seem “reasonable” from an objective point of view; in individual cases, however, it is urgently necessary to consider each individual’s interests, wishes, and prerequisites.
Before choosing a field of study, everyone should ask themselves the central question of whether training or studying is a better fit for a young person’s objectives and desires. Today, however, this is often left entirely out of the equation. As a result, and due to poor preliminary considerations when making career decisions, 28 percent of all bachelor’s students dropped out of their studies in 2015, and 25 percent of training contracts were terminated prematurely. In addition to economic consequences such as increased training costs or a shortage of skilled workers, there are also sometimes significant individual consequences, as dropping out of a training program is often seen as a severe failure.
In a large research project in northern Bavaria, we are investigating how young people can best be trained in decision-making skills so that they are well equipped to make better and more proactive decisions that will have a significant impact on their lives. (www.KLUGentscheiden.de). In addition, I am working closely with the Alliance for Decision Education to promote decision education worldwide.
In order to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, many companies face numerous strategic decisions of utmost importance for their future. Being aware of one‘s objectives is a prerequisite for sound decision making. However, decision and policymakers are often not aware of their objectives when facing important decisions in “normal” times. In addition, specific objectives have to be identified in times of crisis such as theCOVID-19 pandemic.
In this article, we provide guidelines for managers that illustrate the following. (i) How to identify company objectives? (ii) How to align them within their supply chains and with governmental objectives of policy makers? (iii) How to adjust objectives during and after theCOVID-19 pandemic? Furthermore, we suggest comprehensive sets of relevant objectives and propose an iterative process to define, align, and adjust objectives.
The study may help practitioners from business and public administration when making decisions and policies. Researchers may be inspired by the outlined viewpoints on decision-making processes and the addressed perspectives for future research.
Siebert, Johannes U.; Brandenburg, Markus; Siebert, Jana. “Defining and aligning supply chain objectives before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic”, IEEE Engineering Management Review, 48(4), 2020, 72-85, doi: 10.1109/EMR.2020.3032369
The client was seeking a way to evaluate early development projects that would take an integrated view of the portfolio and enable consistent trade-offs. The solution was a multi-attribute prioritization methodology to enable holistic portfolio management and value-based decision making. The innovative methodology uses multi-attribute utility theory and value-focused thinking within the framework of decision quality, providing a consistent evaluation of various early-stage projects within a heterogeneous set of disease areas, thereby enabling trade-offs based on agreed-to decision criteria.
We started the project with a brainstorming/ issue raising session and interviews with key stakeholders to define the appropriate frame, i.e., the purpose, scope, and perspective, consistent with Decision Quality. Further, we challenged the decision makers in interviews to identify their objectives. Referring to value-focused thinking, we created an objectives hierarchy as a means ends network. Using this network and the scientific expertise of client teams, we created meaningful scales to operationalize the decision makers’ fundamental objectives. We facilitated trade-off discussions with the decision makers using the www.entscheidungsnavi.de/en. We built an evaluation model based on a structure that assessed the fundamental objectives and its trade-offs using multi-attribute utility theory. Evaluating a diverse set of pilot projects with a client’s expert group, we challenged the robustness of the methodology. With the backing of the organization, we assessed the entire portfolio of projects using this new methodology. We analyzed the portfolio and identified key impacts of the decision – the level of innovation of the portfolio. We facilitated decision-focused discussions with decision makers by separating discussions about scientific expectations from discussions about strategic preferences and beliefs. Ultimately, at the end of this group decision-making process, the decision makers made a portfolio decision.
Decisions are the only way we can actively influence what is important to us or our organization. Everything else ‘happens’. It is therefore surprising that decision-makers leave much potential for improvement untapped. In the September City Talk, numerous tips will be given on how we can systematically make better decisions and thus achieve what is important to us. About it speaks Prof. (FH) PD Dr. habil. Johannes Siebert from the Management Center Innsbruck.
Topic: Give yourself a nudge: How to ‘nudge’ yourself to systematically make better decisions professionally and personally
Referent: Prof. (FH) PD Dr. habil. Johannes Siebert, Management Center Innsbruck
Date / Time: Wednesday, September 2, 2020, from 6 pm
“Decisions are the only way to actively influence what’s important to you or your organization. Everything else happens. Therefore, it is surprising how much potential for improvement decision-makers leave unused,” says the speaker of the September City Talk, Prof. (FH) PD Dr. habil. Johannes Siebert of the management center Innsbruck. According to Siebert, one way to help people make better decisions is to nudge them. Richard Thaler received the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017 for this approach to behavioral economics. According to Siebert, so-called decision architects set a framework so that people increasingly make decisions that are good for themselves, but also for the community, while ensuring freedom of choice. “If, for example, in a cafeteria,” Siebert explains, “healthy foods are presented in an appealing way directly in the entrance area, then more healthy foods are usually consumed. However, it’s not always possible for a decision architect to ‘nudge’ you, or you may not want to. In the talk, I’ll show how you can ‘nudge’ yourself to systematically make better choices, and how to achieve what’s important to you. To do this, I’ll share numerous, easy-to-apply tips that, if followed consistently, will result in you being more satisfied with your life.”
To the speaker
Prof. (FH) PD Dr. habil. Johannes Siebert studied business administration at the University of Bayreuth (graduating in 2005), received his PhD in 2010 (topic ‘Multicriteria Decision Making’) and his habilitation in 2015 (topic ‘Behavioral Operations Research and Decision Analysis’). Since August 2017, Siebert has been teaching and conducting research at the Management Center Innsbruck in Austria. In addition, he is a private lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Economics at the University of Bayreuth.
The Bayreuth alumnus is considered one of the leading experts in the field of ‘Behavioral Operations Research and Decision Making’: In his research, Siebert investigates human and organizational decision-making behavior and develops methods for decision-makers, from individuals to large organizations, to make better informed His research is published in leading journals.
Siebert has more than ten years of experience in applied decision research. He has worked on and managed research and consulting projects for national and international clients from business, politics and society. For example, he has advised decision-makers at the Pentagon (USA) and the California Department of Transportation as well as board members of large German corporations. In the project ‚KLUGentscheiden‘, he and his team develop decision-making trainings and conduct them with students in Upper Franconia and the Upper Palatinate in graduating classes. Recently, the scientist was accepted into the advisory board of the renowned ‘Alliance for Decision Education’ around Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman. Prof. (FH) PD Dr. habil. Johannes Siebert will use his expertise to help children and young people learn to make conscious and well-considered decisions away from the usual ‘try and error’.
Source: University of Bayreuth, Pressemitteilung Nr. 115/2020, 22. August 2020 (Translation)
Fake news is false news stories packaged and published as if they were genuine with the intention to mislead the reader to damage an agency, an entity, or a person or to increase an internet click revenue. During the 2016 US presidential election campaign, fake news became a global phenomenon, in particular, due to the growing use of social media as a source for news. The proliferation of fake news online has been of increased concern to the European Parliament since. However, no agreement on how to tackle this issue has been reached.
Debiasing refers to attempts to eliminate or at least reduce biases. Only a few debiasing methods have been introduced for the belief-perseverance and confirmation biases so far. Although it was suggested already in early publications that effective debiasing methods should include a combination of various debiasing techniques, scholars have instead focused on isolated debiasing techniques. Moreover, the already limited experimental empirical research on debiasing motivational biases has focused primarily on investigating the efficacy of single debiasing methods without comparing the efficacy of different debiasing methods and without studying their efficiency. Due to missing experimentally-driven comparisons of debiasing methods within one experiment, there are only limited implications for practical applications in terms of which debiasing method to use in order to achieve the best debiasing effect.
The PerFake project aims to fill in this research gap and contribute to the advancement in the research field by:
improving the existing debiasing methods, developing new ones, and combining them;
comparing the efficacy of various debiasing methods and their combinations;
measuring and comparing the efficiency of multiple debiasing methods and their combinations.
The efficacy and efficiency of the debiasing methods will be tested in two questionnaire-based experiments in order to derive recommendations. For the first experiment, we will use and adapt an experimental setting from the literature in which belief perseverance has already been demonstrated. The experimental setting of the second experiment will then be designed in a way to be as close as possible to the fake news environment in order to be able to derive conclusions and recommendations that are applicable in practice.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
