My name is Mauro Bagnato and for over 15 years I have been leading tech organizations.
When I first stepped into leadership, I believed technical expertise was the key to being an effective leader. However, I quickly learned that organizations are living and complex systems and that leading them demands much more than just technical know-how. I believe that curiosity is at the heart of effective leadership. This is what fuels learning and experimentation, both crucial for continuous improvement. This blog aims to explore engineering leadership in all its aspects and to provide insights in a tangible and pragmatic manner. It will also be a space where I will share insights, reflections, and personal takeaways from books, podcasts, and articles that influenced and keep influencing my journey.
On average we make about 35,000 decisions each day.
Of course, not all decisions have the same importance and require deep thinking but 35,000 is a huge number anyway.
How can we possibly do it without feeling overwhelmed?
The answer is simple, we don’t do it. Or better we do it in a smart way!
We can handle this huge amount of decisions because we make most of them without even thinking of it, in a sort of automatic fashion. The “automatic system” of our brain simplifies our life either switching on the “auto-pilot” mode and turning more familiar tasks into routines (no decision needed) or using simpler shortcuts to make decisions so to save our mental energy for something more important.
These shortcuts are called heuristics.
Unfortunately, heuristics are sometimes wrong. They oversimplify a problem/decision, narrowing our focus to a specific aspect only and ignoring many (and potentially important) others.
A cognitive bias, instead, is a systematic pattern that negatively influences our ability to make rational decisions. Cognitive biases are often the result of heuristics.
Heuristics and cognitive biases are only two pieces of a big puzzle but they are key to decoding and possibly improving our decision-making process.
In this post, I am going to focus on one specific cognitive bias called Mental Accounting.
If you are curious enough to keep reading, you will find an answer to the following questions:
Before getting into the crack of it, let’s look at the following scenarios:
You have just found 200 bucks on the street and there is no way to return them to the owner. You are so happy, you didn’t expect to get this money and you definitely know what to do:
Question: Which option is closer to your way of reasoning/behaving?
You are a bit stressed about your finances and want to be more in control of your spending habits. For this reason, you set a monthly budget to track all expenses (i.e. household, leisure activities, etc.).
It is almost the end of the month and you are 200 bucks below the leisure activities budget. What do you do?
Question: Which option is closer to your way of reasoning/behaving?
If you chose Option 1 at least once, I recommend you keep reading!
Definition: Mental accounting is the tendency of treating the same resource differently based on subjective criteria.
No worries…it sounds more difficult than it is!
Let’s look back at the two scenarios now.
In both cases, picking Option 1 means treating money (resource) differently based on either the income source or the intended use (subjective criteria).
If you went for Option 1, in fact, most likely you reasoned in this way:
We tend to fall into the “mental accounting trap” when dealing with resources that have scarcity as a common factor: time, money, effort, etc.
My personal experience with mental accounting is related to spare time.I create mental accounts for my spare time and allocate a specific amount of time for each of them. To make it simpler, I build something similar in my mind:
We use mental accounting because it simplifies our life in two ways:
Unfortunately, mental accounting is a double edge sword:
In a few words, mental accounting narrows our focus. As a result, we base our decisions on a limited set of all available information hence we consider only a subset of all possible outcomes hence we make sub-optimal decisions.
If the “disease” caused by mental accounting is a narrowed focus, the best possible “cure” must be something that forces us to broaden it instead. In fact, a “rational agent” would stop using mental accounts and always consider all possible input data and evaluate all possible outcomes before deciding what is the best way to use time, money, effort, etc.
In case you, like me, don’t always behave like a rational agent, my suggestion is:
keep calm, think twice, and turn the autopilot off!
My point here is not to stop creating mental accounts but rather to stop making decisions without reflecting.
Keeping track and setting a budget for monthly expenses, for example, can definitely be ok as long as you find ways to wake your brain up before making decisions.
The following control questions can be a good “alarm”:
This simple trick will not turn you into a rational agent but will broaden your focus for sure.