Problem:
Follow the prompts, use the information given and make it at least 1200 words:
Normative decision theory is a way to guide decision-making by focusing on rational thinking and carefully comparing different options. According to this theory, an ideal decision-maker sets clear goals, gathered useful information, weighed options using set criteria, and chooses the one that offers the most benefit. The main steps are identifying the problem, looking at possible options, deciding on criteria, comparing each option, and then making a final choice.
Recently, I faced an important decision regarding whether to pursue a new job opportunity. I aimed to be systematic and thorough in my approach, closely resembling the normative decision theory framework. Initially I identified my objective. I tried to find a role that aligns with my career goals and offers a better work life balance. I gathered information regarding job responsibilities, company culture, salary and growth opportunities. This step mirrored the theory's emphasis on collecting relevant data.
However, I noticed that I didn't formally consider every possible option and instead focused on just the two job offers that seemed best. I also set some criteria. Like salary and career growth but I didn't put them in order of importance which is something the theory recommends.
I evaluated each job offer against my primary criteria but in a somewhat informal manner. It was lacking the rigor prescribed by normative decision theory. My information gathering was solid in areas relevant to these specific jobs but I didn't extensively research alternative companies. That was limiting the scope of those options considered. Ultimately while my decision making process was quite thorough I could have benefited from a more structured application of normative decision theory to optimize my choice. Recognizing these shortcomings had contributed to a deeper understanding of effective decision making. It was illustrating how cognitive biases and incomplete evaluations can impede rational judgment.
The classic debate between evidence and intuition is like choosing between a healthy salad and a tempting pizza. One is clearly better for you. But the other is very hard to resist. Well done for choosing a data driven approach! In decision making relying on gut feelings is very risky. Especially if you're also distracted by snacks.
To improve further you could try using anonymous feedback tools in your meetings. This can help reveal honest opinions without putting anyone on the spot. You may find that honesty works better than intuition. Keep up the great work and may the data guide your decisions!
For Lesson 2, prepare an essay of approximately 1,000 words in which you address every aspect of Thought Question 2. Describe the decision context clearly before undertaking the analysis of the event. Be sure to ground the analysis in appropriate references to the reading. For instance, "The type of bias that I believe I exhibited is the one that Bazerman and Moore refer to as "..." (p. xx), and by which they mean "..." (p. xx).
Expected Outcome:
In completing this lesson and preparing the required document for it, you will be better equipped to recognize circumstances in which your reliance on the availability and representativeness heuristics can foster biased estimates of probability that, in turn, may lead to poor decisions. You will also have an enriched vocabulary for distinguishing among different types of specific biases regarding two categories of heuristics. Need Assignment Help?