Indecision and Decision Inertia During Crises

What is this project about?

I have spent more than a decade conducting research to understand the role that indecision plays in times of crisis. My collaborators and I identified that during crises indecision operates in a unique way.

In non-crisis situations, individuals may opt to defer decisions, effectively avoiding committing to a particular course of action until later. However, in moments of crisis, this luxury of decision avoidance is simply not an option.

Consider, for instance, being the Incident Commander in an emergency service. When faced with an immediate crisis, choosing to do nothing is out of the question. Failure to take action can result in the situation spiralling out of control, and it is your duty to prevent that from happening. And yet, amidst this sense of urgency, indecision still manages to creep in. Thus, it becomes imperative to explore the intricacies of this psychological process, which we have named decision inertia.

Decision Inertia

Our research found that during crises indecision occurs through a cognitively active process known as decision inertia.

We define decision inertia as “redundant deliberation over a choice for no gain”.
Power & Alison (2019)

Rather than make a choice, an individual will continually engage in reassessing the situation and options in front of them. They are indecisive, despite being motivated to act and cognitively active.

How to avoid decision inertia?

The key to avoiding decision inertia is to identify ways of breaking the redundant deliberation loop. Our research (Power and Alison, 2019) has identified 5 ways to break this loop.

Reduce task ambiguity.
Task ambiguity increases uncertainty. Are there methods that can be used to reduce uncertainty about the task, for example, technologies to support information processing?
Reduce social/team uncertainty.
When decisions are made in the presence of others it can lead to uncertainty. For example, can you trust advise provided by someone else? Are there ways that social uncertainty can be reduced, for example, through training to learn about team members?
Align goals with the context.
Goals motivate and direct our decisions. Research has shown that when goals are mismatched with the context it can derail decision-making. For example trying to make “the best” decision when all options are imperfect. Can we find ways to sensitise individuals to identify when goals do (or don’t) fit the context?
Build experience dealing with wicked problems.
Crises are filled with wicked problems – novel situations with no right or wrong solution. Those who are unfamiliar with these types of problems are more likely to struggle to make a choice. Regular, immersive training to expose individuals to wicked problems is the key to overcoming decision inertia.
Be aware of individual differences in cognitive processing styles.
Research suggests that certain cognitive styles might increase decision inertia (e.g., those who seek to maximise outcomes) and others might reduce decision inertia (e.g., need for cognitive closure). Can we use this knowledge to inform the selection process of individuals who are going to be key decision makers in an organisation?