Saturday, June 10, 2017

MSLD 632 Module 2- Sheena Iyengar: How to Make Choosing Easier

Having a large selection to choose from may appear interesting, but more doesn’t always mean better. On TED’s How to Make Choosing Easier, Sheena Iyengar argued that having more choices leads to a number of consequences: including lack of engagement, poorer quality choices, as well as lack of satisfaction of the choice (2011). Since these consequences can potentially harm an entire organization, Iyengar suggest four different techniques to prevent ones from offering too many choices:

The first technique Iyengar mentioned is to simply cut the number of options: particularly those that have little to no distinguishable differences. From a business standpoint, Iyengar mentioned that reducing choices can not only simplify and increase the quality of one’s choice, but it can help reduce costs and increase sales (2011).

Concretization is Iyengar’s second technique. To boost the quality of one’s choice, choices must not only have distinguishable differences from others, but they must also have an actual meaning to the decision-maker. For instance in Iyengar’s example with the grocery store, the store owner admits that they weren’t selling well despite having a choice of 75 different bottles of olive oil. This is likely because there’s an overwhelming number of bottles to examine as well as most of them being too similar to one another. Olive oil is olive oil.

A possible suggestion to resolve this issue is to use Iyengar’s third technique: categorization. Rather than laying out all the choices at once, sorting them can help decision-makers pinpoint the choices they’re interested in with ease and speed. For instance, the store owner might consider separating olive oils from cheaper, low quality brands to more expensive, gourmet quality ones. While identifying the products becomes easier, there’s also a meaning to decision-makers: low quality or high quality.

The final technique is the condition for complexity. If there are multiple choices involved, the best approach is to start from low to high choice. The idea is a lot like a flow chart: we have an easy starting point and gradually branch out to pinpoint the ultimate choice. As Iyengar mentioned, starting off with a choice of 50 different paint colors for example can immediately overwhelm decision-makers: ultimately leading them to make poorer quality choices and have lower satisfaction and interest in making further choices.

Many of my personal decision-making are made with a combination of Iyengar’s concretization and categorization techniques. A good example is when I make decisions on purchasing collectible action figures. If there’s a particular cartoon character I want, I go through a number of categories: including size, price range, as well as the kind of figurine (statue or poseable). When I come across something I like, I then ask myself several questions to determine why my choice stands out from all the other choices. In addition, I also consider how the choices are offered to me (if applicable). Despite an excellent price and quality of the figurine, I may not make the choice to purchase the figurine if the customer service or an overall image of the business were poor. When poor qualities are identified, ones start to feel uneasy and consider additional risks in making the choice.

After watching Iyengar’s TED talk, it made me think about my workplace’s recent decision-making. In as little as 5 years, the number of degrees we offer has nearly doubled and is starting to offer degrees outside the aviation focus (what my university mainly specializes in). While the goal is to increase sales and improve student diversity, it made me wonder if increasing the number of degrees will actually benefit the university. I’m starting to notice that some of the degrees are too similar and may be in conflict with Iyengar’s point on concretization (example: Management, Engineering Management, Project Management). As a university that includes “Aeronautical” in their name, many potential students often judge by the name: resulting them to lose interest for our university. While I do not have all the information, I often worry that running multiple degrees and not having enough students will result in a problem with cost: which can eventually hurt my organization. To prevent this from happening, perhaps merging similar degrees or removing “Aeronautical” from the name of our university may help the university and simplify decision-making to future prospective students.


References:
Iyengar, S. (2011). Sheena Yengar: How to Make Choosing Easier. TED. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose


No comments:

Post a Comment