The Psychology of Decision-Making During Crises

Key Insights

• Crises exacerbate cognitive biases, leading to flawed judgments and suboptimal choices.
• Emotions, while providing valuable insights, can cloud judgment and lead to impulsive actions.
• Organizations can mitigate biases and improve crisis decision-making through awareness, structured processes, and emotional regulation.
• Effective crisis leadership requires emotional intelligence, decisiveness, and clear communication.
• Building organizational resilience involves crisis simulations, preparedness, and investment in resources.

Crises are an inevitable part of the modern world. Organizations of all sizes and across all industries face the potential for disruptive events that threaten their operations, stakeholders, and bottom line. These events can range from natural disasters and pandemics to technological failures, economic downturns, and reputational damage. While crisis management plans and business continuity (BC) strategies are essential for navigating these turbulent times, understanding the psychology of decision-making during crises is crucial for enhancing organizational resilience and ensuring effective responses.

This report delves into the intricate ways cognitive biases and emotional responses influence decision-making during crises. By examining the underlying psychological factors at play, we can identify vulnerabilities, develop strategies to mitigate biases, and ultimately improve crisis leadership and decision-making processes to enhance BC effectiveness.

How Cognitive Biases Affect Crisis Decision-Making

Cognitive biases are systematic errors in thinking that can arise from the way we process information. These mental shortcuts, while often helpful in everyday life, can lead to flawed judgments and suboptimal choices, especially in high-stress situations like crises. During a crisis, time pressure, uncertainty, and heightened emotions can exacerbate these biases, potentially hindering effective decision-making. Research on the cognitive requirements of pilots' decision-making tasks and associated errors in the cockpit highlights the impact of these biases in high-pressure environments¹.

Several cognitive biases commonly affect crisis decision-making:

• Confirmation Bias: This bias involves favoring information that confirms pre-existing beliefs and dismissing information that contradicts them. In a crisis, this can lead to selective information gathering and misinterpretation of critical data, potentially leading to poor choices. For instance, imagine a company facing a product recall. Confirmation bias might lead the leadership team to focus on information that downplays the severity of the defect while ignoring evidence suggesting a widespread problem².
• Availability Heuristic: This bias refers to the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events that are easily recalled, often due to their vividness or recent occurrence. During a crisis, readily available information, even if not representative of the overall situation, may unduly influence decisions. For example, if a company recently experienced a data breach, the availability heuristic might cause them to overestimate the likelihood of another breach and allocate excessive resources to cybersecurity at the expense of other critical areas³.
• Anchoring Bias: This bias involves over-relying on the first piece of information received, even if it's irrelevant or inaccurate. In a crisis, initial reports or assessments can anchor decision-makers to a particular perspective, hindering their ability to consider alternative options or adjust their strategies as new information emerges. For example, if the initial assessment of a natural disaster underestimates the extent of the damage, anchoring bias might lead to an inadequate response, even as more accurate information becomes available³.
• Overconfidence Bias: This bias leads individuals to overestimate their abilities and the accuracy of their judgments. In a crisis, overconfidence can result in underestimating risks, neglecting contingency planning, and making decisions with insufficient information. For example, a CEO who is overconfident in their company's ability to weather an economic downturn might delay taking necessary cost-cutting measures, putting the organization at greater financial risk³.
• Groupthink: In cohesive groups, the desire for harmony or conformity can lead to a suppression of dissenting opinions and critical evaluation of ideas. During a crisis, groupthink can result in poor decisions that are not thoroughly vetted or challenged. For instance, a crisis management team might unanimously agree on a course of action without fully exploring alternative solutions or considering potential downsides due to a pressure to present a united front⁴.

Crisis Decision Theory

Crisis Decision Theory (CDT) provides a valuable framework for understanding how individuals respond to negative events⁵. It outlines a three-stage process that people typically go through when facing a crisis:

1. Assessing the severity of the negative event: This involves gathering information about the causes, consequences, and comparative information related to the crisis.
2. Determining response options: Individuals identify potential courses of action, considering the controllability of the event and the feasibility of various responses.
3. Evaluating response options: This stage involves weighing the pros and cons of each option and selecting the most suitable response.

It's important to note that this process is not always linear, and individuals may revisit earlier stages or get "stuck" at a particular stage⁵. Furthermore, factors such as stress, fatigue, and noise can act as stressors that impede effective decision-making, while tools like checklists can serve as mediators to improve decision processes¹.

Individual Differences in Crisis Response

Individual differences in personality, experience, and coping styles can significantly influence decision-making during crises. Some individuals are naturally more resilient and adaptable, while others may be more prone to anxiety or emotional reactivity. Previous experience with crises can also shape how individuals perceive and respond to new challenges.

For example, individuals with a high tolerance for ambiguity may be more comfortable making decisions with incomplete information, while those who prefer certainty may struggle to act decisively in uncertain situations. Similarly, individuals with strong problem-solving skills and a proactive approach to challenges may be better equipped to navigate crises than those who tend to avoid or deny problems.

Ethical Considerations in Crisis Decision-Making

Crises often present ethical dilemmas that can complicate decision-making. Leaders may face difficult choices that involve balancing competing values, such as protecting the organization's reputation versus ensuring the safety of employees or the public. Ethical biases, such as the tendency to favor in-group members or prioritize short-term gains over long-term consequences, can further complicate these decisions.

Research on decision-making in international crises highlights the importance of ethical considerations in crisis management⁶. Studies have shown that while crisis-induced stress can sometimes impair decision-making, there is also evidence that the quality of decision-making can be improved or maintained at acceptable levels in many cases. This suggests that ethical frameworks and a focus on values can help guide decision-makers even in the most challenging circumstances.

The Interplay of Biases and Emotions

Cognitive biases and emotional responses often interact and reinforce each other, creating a vicious cycle that can hinder effective decision-making. For example, fear can exacerbate confirmation bias by making individuals more likely to seek out information that confirms their fears and ignore contradictory evidence². Similarly, anger can amplify the availability heuristic, leading individuals to overestimate the likelihood of negative outcomes and make impulsive decisions based on readily available, but potentially biased, information.

While the article acknowledges the potential downsides of intuitive decision-making under stress, it's important to recognize that intuition can also be a valuable asset in crises, especially for experienced leaders⁸. Intuition can allow leaders to quickly assess situations, recognize patterns, and make rapid decisions when time is of the essence. However, it's crucial to balance intuition with analytical thinking to avoid impulsive or biased choices.

The Role of Emotions in Crisis Decision-Making

Emotions play a powerful role in how we perceive and respond to crises. Fear, anxiety, anger, and panic can significantly influence our thoughts, judgments, and actions. While emotions can provide valuable insights and motivate action, they can also cloud judgment and lead to impulsive or irrational decisions. Stress can further impair decision-making by hindering the prefrontal cortex, the brain's center for logic and reasoning, while simultaneously heightening the influence of the limbic system, which is responsible for emotions⁹.

• Fear and Anxiety: These emotions can narrow our focus, making it difficult to consider a wide range of options or accurately assess risks. In a crisis, excessive fear can lead to indecision, avoidance, or reactive decisions driven by a desire to eliminate the threat quickly, even if those decisions are not the most strategic. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, fear of infection led some organizations to make hasty decisions about closures and layoffs without fully considering the long-term consequences⁷.
• Anger: Anger can lead to impulsive actions, aggression, and a tendency to blame others. While anger can sometimes motivate positive change and action during a crisis, such as when it fuels collective action to address injustice, it can also hinder collaboration, escalate conflicts, and impede rational decision-making. For instance, anger at a perceived lack of government support during a natural disaster might lead community leaders to make rash decisions that exacerbate the situation¹⁰.
• Panic: Panic is an extreme emotional response that can overwhelm cognitive processing and lead to irrational behavior. In a crisis, panic can spread quickly, hindering communication, coordination, and effective action. For example, during a fire evacuation, panic can lead to stampedes and injuries as people try to escape without following established procedures¹⁰.

It's important to note that emotions can also be valuable assets in crisis situations. For example, during the 2008 financial crisis, leaders who incorporated empathy and emotional intelligence into their strategies were able to restore consumer trust and lead their organizations to recover faster¹⁴. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, businesses that communicated transparently and addressed employee concerns with compassion saw improvements in morale and collaboration¹⁴.

The concept of "Stress Induced Deliberation-to-Intuition" (SIDI) helps explain how stress can shift decision-making from analytical to intuitive processes⁸. Under stress, individuals may rely more on gut feelings and automatic responses, which can be helpful in some situations but can also lead to biases and errors in judgment.

Furthermore, certain types of crises, known as "sticky crises," are more likely to evoke strong emotional responses from stakeholders¹⁵. These crises often involve ethical violations, reputational damage, or significant harm to individuals or communities. Recognizing the emotional intensity associated with sticky crises is crucial for developing effective communication and response strategies.

Improving Crisis Leadership and Decision-Making

Recognizing the influence of cognitive biases and emotional responses is the first step toward improving crisis decision-making. Organizations can take proactive steps to mitigate these psychological factors and enhance BC effectiveness:

Individual-Level Strategies

• Acknowledge and Address Biases:

• Raise awareness among decision-makers about common cognitive biases and their potential impact on decision-making.
• Encourage individuals to critically evaluate their assumptions, seek diverse perspectives, and consider alternative interpretations of information.

• Manage Emotional Responses:

• Train individuals in stress management techniques and emotional regulation strategies to maintain composure under pressure.
• Provide access to mental health resources to address emotional distress during and after a crisis.

Team-Level Strategies

• Use Structured Decision-Making Frameworks:

• Implement processes that promote systematic information gathering, risk assessment, and option evaluation.
• Consider using decision-making tools like checklists and decision trees to guide decision processes.

• Seek External Input:

• Bring in outside experts or facilitators to provide objective assessments and challenge internal biases.

• Foster a Supportive Environment:

• Create a culture of psychological safety where individuals feel comfortable expressing concerns and dissenting opinions without fear of retribution.

Organizational-Level Strategies

• Enhance Crisis Leadership:

• Develop leaders who are self-aware, empathetic, and skilled at managing their own emotions and those of others.
• Promote decisive action based on the best available information, while remaining adaptable and open to adjusting strategies as needed.

• Build Organizational Resilience:

• Conduct regular crisis simulations to practice crisis response plans and decision-making processes in realistic scenarios.
• Foster a culture of preparedness that encourages proactive risk assessment, contingency planning, and continuous improvement of BC strategies.
• Invest in technology and resources to equip decision-makers with the tools they need to effectively manage information, communicate, and coordinate responses during a crisis.

Communication Strategies

• Communicate Effectively:

• Foster clear, consistent, and transparent communication to build trust and confidence among stakeholders.
• Use appropriate communication channels to disseminate information effectively to all relevant audiences.
• Tailor communication strategies to address the specific emotional needs of stakeholders during different phases of a crisis.

In addition to these strategies, research has identified several decision-making strategies used by skilled performers in high-pressure environments¹. These strategies include:

• Recognition-Primed Decision-Making (RPD): This model involves quickly recognizing patterns and making decisions based on experience and intuition.
• Option Generation: Skilled decision-makers generate a wide range of potential solutions before evaluating them.
• Mental Simulation: This involves mentally rehearsing different courses of action and their potential consequences.
• Adaptive Decision-Making: This involves adjusting strategies and decisions as new information emerges and the situation evolves.

By incorporating these strategies into crisis management training and decision-making processes, organizations can improve their ability to respond effectively to crises.

Enhance Crisis Leadership

Effective crisis leadership requires a unique set of skills and qualities. Leaders must be able to make difficult decisions under pressure, manage their own emotions and those of others, and communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders.

One important aspect of crisis leadership is the ability to embrace "Whole Brain Thinking." ¹⁶ This approach encourages leaders to consider different perspectives, integrate analytical and intuitive thinking, and make balanced decisions that address both the logical and emotional aspects of a crisis.

Conclusion

The psychology of decision-making during crises is a complex interplay of cognitive biases and emotional responses. By understanding these psychological factors, organizations can take proactive steps to mitigate their negative impact and enhance BC effectiveness. By acknowledging biases, managing emotions, enhancing crisis leadership, and building organizational resilience, organizations can navigate crises with greater confidence, make sound decisions under pressure, and protect their stakeholders and their future.

Integrating these psychological insights into existing BC frameworks and strategies is crucial for enhancing organizational resilience. This involves incorporating training on cognitive biases and emotional regulation into crisis management programs, developing ethical guidelines for crisis decision-making, and fostering a culture that values psychological safety and diverse perspectives. By taking a holistic approach that considers both the cognitive and emotional aspects of crisis decision-making, organizations can improve their ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disruptive events.

Works cited

1. Decision-Making During High-Risk Events: A Systematic Literature ..., accessed January 12, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10564111/
2. 13 Types of Common Cognitive Biases That Might Be Impairing Your Judgment, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.verywellmind.com/cognitive-biases-distort-thinking-2794763
3. Unveiling the Mind: 20 Common Cognitive Biases That Influence Your Decisions - Achology, accessed January 12, 2025, https://achology.com/psychology/20-common-cognitive-biases-that-influence-your-decisions/
4. 16 cognitive biases that can kill your decision making - Board of Innovation, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.boardofinnovation.com/blog/16-cognitive-biases-that-kill-innovative-thinking/
5. www.katesweeny.com, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.katesweeny.com/uploads/2/6/9/4/26944848/sweeny_2008_psychbull.pdf
6. The Impact of Crisis-Induced Stress on Decision Making - The ..., accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219168/
7. Anxiety and Decision-Making - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed January 12, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3864559/
8. Stress potentiates decision biases: A stress induced deliberation-to-intuition (SIDI) model, accessed January 12, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5146206/
9. Why Decisions Are So Hard When In Crisis | Belongly, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.belongly.com/why-decisions-are-so-hard-when-in-crisis/
10. (PDF) The Influence of Anger, Fear, and Emotion Regulation on Ethical Decision Making, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271930212_The_Influence_of_Anger_Fear_and_Emotion_Regulation_on_Ethical_Decision_Making
11. The Influence of Fear on Risk Taking: A Meta-Analysis - PMC, accessed January 12, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7423744/
12. How Can Anger Effect Your Decision Making, accessed January 12, 2025, https://masteringanger.com/blog/how-can-anger-effect-your-decision-making/
13. Portrait of The Angry Decision Maker: How Appraisal Tendencies Shape Anger's Influence on Cognition Jennifer S. Lerner and Lar - Scholars at Harvard, accessed January 12, 2025, https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/jenniferlerner/files/lerner_tiedens_2006.pdf
14. How do psychological factors influence decisionmaking in crisis management?, accessed January 12, 2025, https://vorecol.com/blogs/blog-how-do-psychological-factors-influence-decisionmaking-in-crisis-management-146453
15. Full article: How Emotions Can Enhance Crisis Communication: Theorizing Around Moral Outrage - Taylor & Francis Online, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1062726X.2023.2244615
16. Effective Leadership During Crisis: A Whole Brain® Guide - Herrmann International, accessed January 12, 2025, https://www.thinkherrmann.com/whole-brain-thinking-blog/effective-leadership-during-a-crisis