We often assume that people are motivated by rational self-interest. In this model of behavior, people make choices that they calculate will benefit them most, and most directly. If we want to predict behavior, or direct it, all we have to do is provide the right "incentives" or "disincentives" and we can get people to do what we need them to do.
If only Life were that simple.
Although predictions on the basis of the rational model can be successful, some have come to believe that strict adherence to the rational model is not only limiting, but often wrong.
The problem is that sometimes people don't choose rationally, and even when they do, they often choose differently from what we might expect if we consider only the content of the issue. Here are some reasons why.
- It's always a judgment call
- In the organizational context, the consequences of choices are rarely all good or all bad. People have to decide what they care about and how much, and people do differ.
- Some people react to the past
- Sometimes people don't
choose rationally. Even
when they do, they
apply their own judgment,
- Something about the situation might trigger responses from childhood, or from other experiences. People then react to those past experiences instead of reacting to the here-and-now.
- Some are overloaded
- Some people must choose quickly, because of real or perceived time pressure. In haste, they make choices that differ from those they would make if they felt they had more time.
- Some feel peer pressure
- Some make choices on the basis of the choices they perceive others making. They want either to be like others, or to be unlike others.
- Some fear imaginary consequences
- When they lack concrete knowledge, some people make up some pretty terrifying scenarios. Then they react to what they've imagined, instead of to what is.
- Some have wrong information
- The information on which they base choices can be wrong, out-of-date, or incomplete. Or they might have misunderstood or forgotten the information they did have.
- Some seek revenge
- Anger or thirst for revenge can cause some to make choices to harm others, ignoring (or blinded to) consequences that are seriously harmful to themselves.
- Some have received bad advice
- Even when people have all the facts right, some follow bad advice or misguided (or worse) leaders.
- Some have cut deals
- Sometimes people make choices that are counter to their own interests, because — rightly or otherwise — they expect someone else to intervene or to support them in another context.
Finally, some believe that the world consistently works in ways that it does not. This can cause them to make choices that might not be in their own self-interest — they might even choose to use the rational model to devise ways to influence the choices of others. Top Next Issue
The article you've been reading is an archived issue of Point Lookout, my weekly newsletter. I've been publishing it since January, 2001, free to all subscribers, over the Web, and via RSS. You can help keep it free by donating either as an individual or as an organization. You'll receive in return my sincere thanks — and the comfort of knowing that you've helped to propagate insights and perspectives that can help make our workplaces a little more human-friendly. More
For more on irrational decision-making, see the report by Paul Solman on the May 10, 2005, edition of the PBS program The News Hour with Jim Lehrer. The report is available in text, streaming audio, or streaming video. It emphasizes the work of Terry Burnham, author of Mean Markets and Lizard Brains: How to Profit from the New Science of Irrationality, published in 2005 by Wiley. Order from Amazon.com.
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenoCKDgorNSzMRPVhiner@ChacAsyIdewMnebfULUIoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Emotions at Work:
- The Fallacy of the False Cause
- Although we sometimes make decisions with incomplete information, we do the best we can, given what
we know. Sometimes, we make wrong decisions not because we have incomplete information, but because
we make mistakes in how we reason about the information we do have.
- Handling Heat: I
- Heated exchanges in meetings are expensive to both the organizational mission and to the careers of
the meeting's participants. Preventing them — or dealing with them when they happen — is
everyone's job. But what can you do when they persist?
- The Problem of Work Life Balance
- When we consider the problem of work life balance, we're at a disadvantage from the start. The term
itself is part of the problem.
- Staying in Abilene
- A "Trip to Abilene," identified by Jerry Harvey, is a group decision to undertake an effort
that no group members believe in. Extending the concept slightly, "Staying in Abilene" happens
when groups fail even to consider changing something that everyone would agree needs changing.
- Not Really Part of the Team: II
- When some team members hang back, declining to show initiative, we tend to overlook the possibility
that their behavior is a response to something happening within or around the team. Too often we hold
responsible the person who's hanging back. What other explanations are possible?
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming March 21: Narcissistic Behavior at Work: III
- People who behave narcissistically tend to regard themselves as special. They systematically place their own interests and welfare ahead of anyone or anything else. In this part of the series we consider how this claimed specialness affects the organization and its people. Available here and by RSS on March 21.
- And on March 28: Narcissistic Behavior at Work: IV
- Narcissistic behavior at work is more damaging than rudeness or egotism. It leads to faulty decisions that compromise organizational missions. In this part of the series we examine the effects of constant demands for attention and admiration. Available here and by RSS on March 28.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenbJWqbFHkmGIgoLoWner@ChaczxUISckKmuyyKBqHoCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.