Making better decisions can help make better outcomes.
We can't have a meeting or a vote before every decision. We can research how others make decisions and ask questions before our decisions.
1) What is the cost of not making a decision?
2) What are the pros and cons of our decision?
3) What (else) can we do now to help us make the decision? In other words, what information can help us make a more informed decision?
Keeping a 'decision journal' resonates for me. That allows us to record both our process and the outcomes of decisions. "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread."
Think about where we made "bad decisions." We were playing an above .500 team on the road. I elected to press out of the gate and we immediately (one minute) fell behind 6-0. Timeout. We fell behind early by a dozen and rallied back but lost by about six. It would have been better to wait and see how the talent level and game unfolded.
"Good judgment comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgment."
At basketball camp, there was a free throw shooting contest. Ten shots. "Who wants to go..." I popped up immediately. My rationale? "Put up a big number and the pressure is on everyone else." 10/10. Not many high school kids can make 10/10 under pressure. Going first was right for me.
System 1 (reflexive) or System 2 (reflective)?
Kahneman and Tversky realized that we have a heuristic (System 1, rapid, back of the envelope) decision process and a more measured one (System 2). Speeding car coming at us. Jump out of the way. Deciding on a new job or relocation - take our time.
Weight of the argument
Bob Iger (Disney) approached Steve Jobs (Pixar) about the possibility of a merger. Jobs made two columns on a whiteboard - pros and cons. He listed three pros and about twenty cons. Iger presumed the idea was dead. Jobs agreed to the merger because the strength of the pros, especially synergy, outweighed the cons.
Listen first, then decide
Nelson Mandela accompanied his father to community meetings. His father wanted to teach Mandel how to lead. The father always spoke last. That afforded him time and nuance to consider many points of view. Become a listener to become a better decision maker.
An Irresistible Force
Jerry Tarkanian wrote in "Runnin' Rebel" that he was making $94,000 annually at UNLV as a Full Professor. Jack Kent Cooke offered him a million over five years to coach the Lakers. When Tark returned to Vegas, he found his agent bound and shot in the trunk of a car. Tark interpreted that as locals unhappy at the prospect of him leaving Las Vegas. Someone made him an offer he couldn't refuse.
Review our decision-making approaches and reflect upon whether improvement is possible.
Lagniappe. More on decision making...heavy input from AI
Here are five core principles that crystallize Ed Smith’s thinking in Making Decisions: Putting the Brain in Gear — a book centered on judgment, bias, pattern-recognition, and the craft of choosing well under uncertainty.
1. Good decisions are about process, not outcome.
Success can mislead. A good result doesn’t necessarily mean a good decision — many poor choices are rescued by luck, and many sound decisions can fail. Ed Smith stresses evaluating how the decision was made: the evidence considered, the reasoning applied, and the alternatives weighed.
Judge the choice by its logic, not just its ending.
Think about the film, "Draft Day." A thorough process helps the GM avoid making a bad decision.
2. Bias is inevitable — awareness is the tool, not elimination.
Smith is honest: we can’t remove bias from human cognition. But we can recognize patterns — recency bias, confirmation bias, sunk-cost fallacy — and build structures to counterbalance them. Reflection and dissent aren’t nuisances; they’re safeguards.
Metacognition is armor for judgment.
Deciders weigh different factors differently. In "The Undoing Project," Michael Lewis explains how Daryl Morey leverages a player's age at time of the NBA draft, the school attended, and performance in making selections. Jayson Tatum (Duke) and Jaylen Brown (Cal) both played one year in college. Payton Pritchard played four at Oregon and became an NBA 6th Man award winner.
3. Data informs decisions — but can’t replace judgment.
Smith, a former selector in cricket, notes that analytics sharpen clarity, but data lacks meaning until interpreted. Leadership requires understanding why numbers matter — and when experience or intuition adds texture numbers can’t.
Data ≠ decision.
Data + interpretation + humility → better decisions.
Michael Lombardi explained how the Patriots got inside information about the character of SEC footballers by maintaining contacts within SEC sororities. The women of the SEC provided information that the NFL Combine couldn't.
4. Think in options, not certainties.
He argues decisively for optionality. Great decision-makers avoid tunnel vision and cultivate multiple futures. The goal isn’t to predict perfectly, but to expand the range of viable paths. When the environment shifts — and it always does — rigid plans snap, flexible ones bend.
Hold convictions lightly; hold awareness tightly.
When applying to college, most students have "reach" and "safety" schools. Without a range of options, their outcomes are both limited and risky.
5. The quality of thinking rises with diversity of input.
Groupthink is the enemy of judgment. Smith emphasizes that teams make stronger decisions when built from varied perspectives — not sameness. He champions contrarian voices, domain cross-pollination, and a culture where disagreement is safe rather than subversive.
The best rooms aren’t quiet — they’re curious.
Within the State Department, the "Dissent Channel" has allowed for pushback against possibly disastrous policy. More input can permit better decisions.
