So . . . there's two types of people in the world. I like this intro because it can really go anywhere - just fill in the following blanks: those who (blank) and those who don't (blank). It can be fun and is really flexible. Use things like "watch The View" and "don't watch the View." Or "like Dan Brown's novels" and "read crap." Today I'm writing about a different kind of distinction, though. On what may be the fundamental difference between types of people after the jump.
The two types of people: maximizers and satisficers. To maximize is to always look for the objectively best option. To satisfice means to choose the first acceptable option. For example, a maximizer will listen to a bit of each radio station before choosing which one he'll listen to. A satisficer will just stop looking when they get to the first song they like. Another example would be choosing gum in a grocery store. A maximizer will examine each package and will not feel he has made a good choice unless all of the options has been considered. A satisficer will look only until he finds one that suits his needs.
Why is this difference so important? Well, being a satisificer and being close to many maximizers, it's a huge difference. The two types just don't understand each other. Try playing Scrabble with a maximizer - you need a time limit or he will just keep thinking until he's sure that he has the best possible word (by the way, you may have noticed I'm only using masculine pronouns in my examples; it's not meant to be sexist, it's just the way I tend to write. Women can be maximizers and satisficers too, ever since the Gender Equality in Decision-Making Act of 1978).
The advantage to being a satisficer is that you aren't spending additional (or, to us satisficers, useless) time to try to perfect a decision when that additional time is not cost-effective. I could spend an eternity deciding between entree options at a restaurant, but is my choice going to be that much better than if I had just ordered the first thing that looked good? It may be that satisficers are lazier, but it's more likely that it is due to a lack of perceived improvement in the choice through additional time spent. Satisficers gain utility through making efficient decisions, even if some accuracy may be lost.
The advantage to being a maximizer, on the other hand, is that you are less likely to miss out on potential beneficial options. Furthermore, you are more confident that you have made a sound decision, and therefore (due to the confirmation bias) more likely to perceive your decision as correct, regardless of the outcome. Maximizers lose value if they feel there were unexplored options and gain value through a feeling of thoroughness.
Can maximizers and satisficers coexist? Of course, but when joint decisions must be made it can be frustrating. The maximizer perceives the satisficer as putting insufficient effort into the decision, and the satisficer perceives the maximizer as wasting time on unnecessary details. In my experience it ends up that maximizers are better at the background research part and satisficers better at making the decision (the act of, not necessarily making good decisions). So if we can take the better part of each they can work well (i.e. working in series). If the two types work in parallel, that's when problems arise.
As a satisficer, of course I believe that you maximizers are all nuts. And that's okay. You probably think I'm nuts too, and you would have put more time and effort in coming to that conclusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment