In life, we are all looking for certainty. We are often able to achieve this by asking for more than we need, but who pays for the spare capacity or redundancy we don’t end up using?
Do you buy more milk and bread than you will use when you so your weekly grocery shopping?
Do you give yourself extra time during your morning commute or when you have an important meeting you need to be on time for?
Do you ask for more money than you need just so you can buy some of the stuff you have always dreamt of.
Today, I made a decision that could cost my millions because the unused redundancy could cost millions.
Where is the break-even point where a redundancy is no longer attractive? When it’s too expensive or is it when we can’t stomach the undesired outcome? To me, it appears that we often make these trade-offs willy-nilly, but there are massive trade-offs at steak that are brains often prefer to simplify to a simple yes or no.
As Nick Tasler pointed out in his concise Harvard Buisness Review article, “fast and roughly right decision making will replace deliberations that are precise and slow”. Interestingly, we all know that in the “real world” there is no perfect solution. In most instances, following Einstein’s guidance: “as simple as possible, but not simpler” can be the most efficient means of resolving the issue. Tasler suggests using the simple know-think-decide framework to make”roughly right decisions”.