After watching an
incredible TED video of Dr. Sheena Lyengar, I’ve been able to revel in my
newfound observations on life and choice. It’s been rather eye opening for both
myself and how I perceive choice, and how I view others in making their own
choice. Today I am going to comment on three assumptions that Dr. Lyengar makes
in her video and how it’s been a part of my life. The three assumptions are
that Americans believe they should make their own choice, they believe more
options lead to better choice, and that they believe everyone should never say
no to choice.
The first
assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes is that Americans believe they should make
their own choices (independent of others). What this means is that those of a
particular cultural upbringing believe that only they know best when it comes
to decisions that affect them. However in her study she was able to conclude
that while those of an Anglo-American upbringing performed best in anagram
solving when they perceive their actions as their own choice, Asian-American
individuals performed best in anagram solving when they perceived their actions
as being directed by their mothers. What this shows is that people of certain
backgrounds may be more open to manipulation, provided that this particular individual
looks up to another as someone they trust and respect. This especially holds
true for myself (because I come from an Asian-American upbringing) when it
comes to dating girls, because in the back of my mind I always think about
whether or not my family (mainly mom and dad) would approve. If I think my
family would disapprove, I don’t go near the girl.
In many overseas
assignments, fresh Airman are separated from their friends and families. This
creates a special bond between individuals in the flight and in essence, the
Air Force becomes their new family. Flight chiefs essentially play the role of
mommy and daddy as they are ultimately responsible for an Airman’s well-being. Through
Dr. Lyengar’s first assumption, if flight chiefs can develop the trust and
respect of an Airman, they may be able to shape the Airman’s decisions to more
closely match the goals of the Air Force. If a potential deployment were to
come up where manning is already critically numbered and an Airman has a choice
between getting stationed in the states or extending to see a deployment, a
flight chief has the potential to nudge the Airman towards deploying which
helps achieve the mission.
The second
assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes about American thinking is that more options
lead to better choice. What this means is that when an individual has an
increased number of selections to choose from, they will be capable of
rationalizing the best choice that provides them with the most benefit. However,
“a number of [her] studies have shown that when you give people 10 or more
options when they’re making a choice, they make poorer decisions.” This is
especially true with my dating life. Ever since I broke up with my Kindergarten
girlfriend, I was reluctant to get another because I always knew that there
would be better. Well look 19 years later into my life and see where that’s
gotten me. Indecision was a poor decision made on my part because of the large
selection of options that were presented to me. Luckily though, there is some
light at the end of the tunnel so hold the pity until at least this weekend
(haha).
So how does this
affect leadership? Well it seems fairly obvious that in order to help someone
make a wiser decision that the number of choices need to be reduced. I was able
to see this happen with one of my working buddies. Before he had zero intention
on staying overseas and wanted to go back to the states. He said the whole
process of extending is so complicated that it’s a huge pain in the butt to
even think about it (we’re given about 6 options when it comes to extending,
however each option branches outward leading to many other decisions). My
flight chief was able to virtually limit the number of options he had to: not
extend or extend for 9 months. Putting it in simple terms like this made the
whole process easier to think about for my buddy and now he’s actually
considering about staying. Being incredibly short manned already, this leads to
a better outcome for the overall Air Force mission of this base.
The third
assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes about American thinking is that everyone
should never say no to choice. What this means is that one should never faithfully
put the decisions of one’s own life into someone else’s hands. Dr. Lyengar concluded
through her studies that when a choice has to be made between two terribly bad
decisions, that overall happiness is better when the choice is made by an
outsider. This was especially true for me while growing up. I always hated it
when the teacher in grade school tells everyone to partner up and it puts me in
a situation of choosing between two friends. I like both friends equally, but
choosing one with hurt my relationship with the other. However when the teacher
chooses for me, everyone understands that it was an outsider that made the
decision and not myself. This would lead to a better overall happiness from all
parties.
So how would this
translate into being a leader? Well what this means is that if a leader wants
to increase overall follower happiness, that they should remove choice from the
followers hands and make the decisions themselves. However this poses a
problem. Dr. Lyengar asked a number of American parents who had just lost their
child whether or not if they would have preferred an outsider make the decision
of killing life support. Every single one said they would have rather made their
own choice, even if it meant an overall increase in depression and sadness for
themselves. What this could potentially mean (and where we have room to learn),
is that while leaders could increase follower happiness if they removed choice
from the followers hands, that the action could potentially hurt the overall
relationship between follower and leader. As said before with the Dr. Lyengar’s
first assumption, if trust and respect are the key to influencing someone’s
decision, increasing their happiness (for their benefit) may reduce the amount
of trust and respect one has with this person. So when it comes to the [Air
Force] mission, where would a moral leader stand? Increasing a followers
happiness but lose influence, or decrease their happiness and gain influence?
The three
assumptions made by Dr. Lyengar are that Americans believe they should make
their own choice, they believe more options lead to better choice, and that
they believe everyone should never say no to choice. I was able to reflect how
these were able to relate to my own life and I commented a little about how a
leader could potentially look at these assumptions and apply it to their own
decision making. I’m really grateful to have watched this video because it has
given me a new perspective on how others perceive choice and it has helped
solidify my own understanding on how I perceive choice.
References
Iyengar, S. (2010, Jul). Sheena
Iyengar: The art of choosing. Retrieved from TED:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/sheena_iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing.html
No comments:
Post a Comment