A632.2.3.RB_Davis Carl  - Sheena Iyengar: How to Make Choosing Easier

Hello readers! This week we were tasked with watching Ms. Sheena Iyengar’s TED talk about making the action of choosing easier. (TED, 2011) As an interesting aside, Ms. Iyengar’s job description on the TED website is Psycho-economist. If you take the time to listen to her or read some of her work, I think you’ll see the irony.

Ms. Iyengar’s lecture begins with a description of a supermarket in California that was renowned for its extensive variety of products and extremely wide selection of those products. One example cited was that there were 348 different kinds of jam on the shelves. (2011) Sheena was curious to know how people reacted to that number of choices and she got the manager to allow her to set up an experiment.

Tastings were conducted with six jams available for tasting and then when there were 24 available. The number of tasters was tracked and then the number of those who then purchased a jar of jam were tracked. More people tried the jams when there were 24 open for a taste. However, more people bought jam after tasting from the table with six offerings. Less offerings, more purchases is a theme carried on in a study Sheena also did regarding funds in which to invest 401(k) monies. Plans with more choices had fewer participants. (2011)

After looking at these examples and others, Ms. Iyengar concluded that there were four ways to help people facing choices with an extreme number of offerings. Their names are Cut, Cement, Categorization, and Condition for Complexity.

To perform Cut, as the name implies, one should reduce the number of choices facing the chooser. Ms. Iyengar mentions Proctor & Gamble reducing the number of varieties of a dandruff shampoo from 26 to 15 and seeing a sales increase of 10%, as well as a cat litter company reducing the number its offerings and seeing a jump in profits of 87%! (2011)  It appears that while we like choice, we really like some choice, not unlimited choice.

When applying the Cement technique, it is necessary to paint a picture for the chooser so they may see the long term effects of making the choice you would like them to make. Sheena notes a company that saw a dramatic increase in retirement fund participation, and an increase in monies deposited monthly, after adding a cementing paragraph to their website page where elections where executed. By reminding the participants that adding just a little more to their contribution now would allow them to live more than “just comfortably” in retirement they filled in what may have been a gap and made a strong connection.

Categorizing has a similarity to Cut. Both reduce the number of choices available to the chooser. However, in categorizing, all of the options remain available. The choices are grouped into smaller categories which are more easily reviewed and digested, as it were. The illustration of a grocery store magazine rack and the hundreds of magazine titles vying for attention was presented.  Amazingly, 600 magazines divided into ten categories is easier to choose from than 400 divided into 20 categories. (2011)

The last technique, Condition for Complexity, resembles the use of a building block approach to complex choice situations. A car manufacturer’s website, with a “build your own car” capability, was the illustration cited by Ms. Iyengar. (2011) Each different area of the car had a varying number of choices from four to 56. The total number of areas to make decisions about numbered 60. By checking at what point web visitors began simply hitting the default choice presented as they moved through the 60 choices, the point where the chooser had basically quit choosing was noted. If the areas were presented in a random manner, such as an area with four choices was followed by one with 40 and then one with 15, the chooser opted for the default much sooner than if the number of choices steadily increased from small to large. The chooser was able to handle small increases in number better that randomly, it appears. (2011)

As the leader of a team, I have found great success with the Cement technique. Helping people see the possible outcomes for choices is a powerful tool. Additionally, they derive the capability to start to see the end-states of decisions they face and own the choice even more. I would add that I utilize the Categorize technique and then apply the Cement technique. Anything that helps me and my team get a better grasp on the data or choices.

In my personal life, I have employed the Condition for Complexity technique in dealing with situations like home or car purchases or other complex choices with long-term implications. I like Cut and Categorize for daily decisions. They allow for getting decisions done quickly. In reality, I practice Cement so much that it seems like second nature. I just realized that.

I think a large part of making a good decision is having the situational awareness to know what tool to apply and what the probable implications of the decision. Knowledge is power, especially when making a choice. Applying the above tools will only help in that task, as well.

TED (Producer). (2011, January 18, 2016). Sheena Iyengar: How to make choosing easier. [Lecture] Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose