Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM BlitzĀ®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERMĀ® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Greg Hutchins Leave a Comment

Solution Aversion

Solution Aversion

Guest Post byĀ Ed PerkinsĀ (first posted on CERMĀ Ā® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

There is no end to helpful advice about making decisions.

Most of this advice assumes that decision-making is fact-based, procedural, and decision-makers can follow a process. You need to have proper ā€œframingā€, know desired outcomes, be objective, evaluate alternatives, etc.

In theory, this is very good advice.

Decision making

But as we have seen in prior articles (e.g. Ā http://insights.cermacademy.com/2013/11/30-how-not-to-make-bad-risk-decisions-ed-perkins/#more-3026) in practice decision-making is a messy process, and many things can occur that result in ā€œbadā€ decisions.

In a recently published study[1], researchers at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business found that people evaluate the need for a decision based on whether they view the implications of the solution as desirable.

If they are skeptical of the solution(s), they tend to deny that the problem exists.

The researchers used some policy-related topics such as global warming, air pollution, and gun crime, and presented study participants with two solution options.

Interestingly while most participants agreed with the premise of the topics (the need for a solution), they disagreed with a solution if they felt that solution was unpalatable to their ideological worldview.

In their study, they used groups of conservatives and liberals. For conservatives, when the solution options involved some type of regulation, they disagreed (as they were ideologically opposed to regulation), but when it involved a market solution, they agreed (as they were ideologically disposed to free markets).

Lest they be accused of anti-conservative bias, they ran a second experiment on gun control, in which case it was the liberals who disagreed with the solution options that were ideologically challenging.

Solution aversion

The researchers called this phenomenon ā€œsolution aversionā€. Ā They noted that in general people will deny facts that threaten their ideologies, whether they are on the left, right or center.

How does this apply to risk decisions?

We all have seen instances where, especially for risk mitigation, decision makers refuse to adopt a solution. Despite all the evidence, if they don’t like the options they oppose them and argue against the need for the decision in the first place. (ā€œDo we really need to do this?ā€, ā€œThese options won’t solve the problemā€, ā€œThe ROI is too low/cost is too muchā€)

Thus the decision may be ā€˜no decision’ (e.g. keep with the status quo) even though it is obvious the status quo is not a desirable solution.

So now we can add Solution Aversion to Confirmation Bias and Attribution Error as behaviors to be wary of when making risk decisions.

So what should you do

So what does this mean if you are the risk manager requesting a risk decision?

You need to be aware if there are ideological biases that will result in solution aversion and see if you can offer solution options that are not viewed as adverse.

And what does this mean if you are the risk decision maker? This means that if you allow ideological concerns to interfere with your duty and responsibility, you may find yourself increasing the risk to your career longevity – you may be facing the consequences sooner or later.

The news is full of risk decision makers who chose unwisely and were unable to escape the consequences.

 

References

[1] ā€œDenying Problems When We Don’t Like the Solutionsā€, seeĀ http://today.duke.edu/2014/11/solutionaversion

ā€œSolution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbeliefā€

Campbell, Troy H.; Kay, Aaron C.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 107(5), Nov 2014, 809-824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037963

Bio: Ā 

Ed Perkins is a principal cyber engineer at Quality + Engineering. Ā He can be reached at 971.344.5976,.

Filed Under: Articles, CERMĀ® Risk Insights, on Risk & Safety Tagged With: Ed Perkins

« Agitator Shafts Thrust Bearing
What is Maintenance Planning? »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CERMĀ® Risk Insights series Article by Greg Hutchins, Editor and noted guest authors

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • Risk Prioritization in FMEA – a Summary
  • What Are Best Practices for Facilitating Qualitative Assessments?
  • So, What’s Still Wrong with Maintenance
  • Foundation of Great Project Outcomes – Structures
  • What is the Difference Between Quality Assurance and Quality Control?

© 2023 FMS Reliability Ā· Privacy Policy Ā· Terms of Service Ā· Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading ourĀ Cookies Policy.