Judgment in Crisis Debrief Worksheet

Jana Lee Cox

February 22, 2019
Updated September 10, 2021
OGL 220: Behavioral Dynamics in Organizations
Professor Dave Thomas

Assignment Instructions: Please respond to the following questions:

What key decisions did you make?  Why did you make those choices?
How did you cope with the high level of ambiguity in the situation?  How did you handle the lack of
complete information?
What real-life situations mirror the conditions of the simulation?
What advice do you have for managers in these types of crisis situations?

One key decision I made in the simulation (Roberto, 2014) was where to initially focus our
investigation (device malfunction or user error). I chose to investigate the device, because the
information I received implied malfunction. I received reports of user error as well, but they
seemed less substantiated—significant enough, however, that had the simulation allowed, I
would have investigated both possibilities.

Another key decision was whether to ship a new device to consumers or a supply of test strips. I
chose to ship new devices, for two reasons: 1) Shipping a different brand of test strips as a
temporary fix until users bought a new device seemed complicated and confusing, and detracted
from our end goal of marketing the new, more accurate test strips. 2) I could save 200 jobs by
sending inferior quality test strips, but I wanted to try saving the other 400 as well by sending
new devices, which I felt would be worth the risk.

Next, I had to decide whether to revise product instructions or initiate a communication

campaign with doctors. I chose to educate doctors, thinking they would have better success by
explaining and demonstrating device use to their patients.

When that proved unsuccessful, I chose to revise product instructions, rather than provide posters
for doctors who weren’t successfully educating their patients. I felt doctors would continue to
teach, with or without posters, but that clear and accurate product instructions were necessary to
avoid patient confusion.

Finally, I was asked to estimate if the number of users who synch the device to a smartphone less
frequently than monthly was more or less than 10%, and by what percentage. Knowing my own
inclination to procrastinate routine tasks and putting myself into consumers’ shoes to guess their
response, I estimated it to be 75%.

I didn’t feel stressed by the high level of ambiguity in the simulation. I’m not sure why. It may
have been different if I knew it was real, but to me it was more like a puzzle to be solved. Since I
knew I wasn’t getting complete information, I explored possible solutions on my own, then
compared them with data I received from the simulation. In the end, I reminded myself to make
the best decision with the information I had and deal with the consequences if I was wrong.

I feel the simulation accurately demonstrated real-life challenges in any company releasing a
new, life-changing product into the market. There will always be problems, most of them
unexpected. My advice for managers is to, first of all, have a financial cushion to deal with the
problems. Listen to those reporting to you but beware of cognitive biases by challenging
everything you hear and think. Make sure decisions reflect your concern for consumers as well
as employees and associates, by finding the win-win solution.

____________________

Briefly define confirmation bias and discuss how this concept was illustrated within the simulation. 
Next, provide an example or illustration of how you have experienced this bias in your own life.
Finally, what strategies might you employ to help you avoid the confirmation bias in your decision
making?

Confirmation bias occurs when you see the results you expect, that reinforce what you already
believe to be true, in the data you see. In the simulation (Roberto, 2014), most of the introductory
briefings and communications indicated there was a problem with the microprocessor.
Subsequent information, while exploring both options, would still appear to favor device
malfunctions to those influenced by confirmation bias.

One big example of confirmation bias occurred frequently in my family growing up. One family
member was certain a second family member was purposely making life difficult. Since I could
see the big picture, I saw not only that this was false, but also how anything the second family
member did could be misconstrued to support the first’s inaccurate belief.

It’s important to always challenge your own beliefs and consider that they might be wrong or
distorted. Getting an unbiased, second opinion can also help one avoid making decisions based
on confirmation bias.

__________________

Briefly define sunk cost trap and discuss how this concept was illustrated within the simulation. 
Next, provide an example or illustration of how you have experienced this trap in your own life.
Finally, what strategies might you employ to help you avoid the sunk cost trap effects in your decision
making?

Sunk Cost trap occurs when a person spends additional money trying to make a failed project
succeed. This is influenced by several factors, including the inability to own up to a bad decision
and the desire to preserve one’s reputation. In the simulation (Roberto, 2014), this was illustrated
by the choice of many users to increase spending on an educational campaign that was failing.
When a person makes an expensive decision, it’s difficult to admit it was the wrong decision,
and people often feel they just need to spend more money to make it work.

I’ve seen this first-hand in my life while watching my son sink more costly repairs into his old
minivan. He spent a lot of money to buy the car, and when it started having mechanical problems
he compared the cost of making the repair versus buying a newer car, and felt like the lower cost
justified the repair. In actuality, he's spent more than enough on repairs to have bought a better
car. In addition, he kept track of how much he had already spent on it, feeling it somehow added
value, and that by selling the car he would lose everything he put into it (loss aversion)—not
considering that it was already lost.

Strategies that might help a person avoid the sunk cost trap include differentiating between sunk
costs and future costs, setting a spending limit on a financial decision, and treating each decision
on it’s own merits, not basing it on prior decisions.

__________________

Briefly define the anchoring effect and discuss how this concept was illustrated within the simulation. 
Next, provide an example or illustration of how you have experienced this effect in your own life.
Finally, what strategies might you employ to help you the avoid anchoring effect in your decision
making?

The anchoring effect occurs when we anchor to the first value we hear and attach subsequent
values in the decision-making process to that anchor. This was demonstrated in the simulation
(Roberto, 2014) by the direction to estimate the percentage of users who synch their device to
their smartphone less frequently than once a month. Users were first asked to indicate if this
percentage was higher or lower than a given percent—in my case, 10%. The anchoring occurred
when users allowed this number to influence their final estimation. Most users estimated a lower
percentage than users that were given a higher percentage to anchor to.

I’ve experienced this anchoring bias in several sales proposals. When considering a new piece of
printing equipment for our business, the salesperson first gave us an anchor—the price of a new
printer of the same make and model. Then, when he introduced the actual price of the piece we
were looking at, it seemed much more reasonable.

One strategy to help avoid anchoring in decision making is to be aware. Knowing we have the
tendency to anchor to the first value we hear can help us challenge our connection to that value.
Another strategy is to get another opinion or take time to research.

_________________

Briefly define framing bias and discuss how this concept was illustrated within the simulation. 
Next, provide an example or illustration of how you have experienced this bias in your own life.
Finally, what strategies might you employ to help you avoid the framing bias in your decision making?

The Framing Bias is when we are influenced in our decisions based on how the proposal is
presented, or “framed”; for instance, focusing on the increased value of a product when
introducing a price increase. A more specific form of framing introduced in the simulation is the
concept of gain vs. loss; that framing a proposal in the context of “saving lives” influenced
people to be less accepting of risk, than if the same proposal was framed as “avoiding deaths.”

In the simulation (Roberto, 2014), this concept was presented with the choice between two
options, where doing nothing would automatically trigger layoffs of 600 people. Option 1 would
“save 200 jobs.” Option 2 provided an element of risk—all jobs might be saved, but there was a
significantly higher probability that all jobs might be lost. Under this framing context of “saving
jobs,” most users, as predicted, chose the less risky Option 1.

While I’m less familiar with the gain vs. loss concept of framing, the study of language is a
hobby I enjoy, and I’ve noticed how context and word choice can influence people. Including or
emphasizing certain details, while excluding and deemphasizing others can change how people
perceive what is being communicated. I’ve noticed a lot of framing in political and marketing
environments, but I’ve also seen this personally when one family member was in conflict with
another. Each person had their own, very different, version of the conflict, and each felt they
were being truthful.

The first strategy one must use to avoid being influenced by framing is awareness. Being aware
that information is frequently distorted, intentionally or not, by the person sharing it, and having
an open mind to consider all angles and possibilities, will help one keep perspective and avoid
making decisions that are based on biased information.
 Reference

Roberto, M. (2014, December 30). Organizational Behavior Simulation: Judgment in a

Crisis [Simulation]. Harvard Business Publishing Education. 
https://hbsp.harvard.edu/coursepacks/585921