Deciding under stress: what habits cannot guarantee
In Basel, a deviation in pharmaceutical production, a disruption to Rhine logistics or an international R&D decision can put managers under strain. The managerial question is specific: how can they check that a tried-and-tested response remains appropriate when the conditions that justified it have changed?
What the literature establishes
Lars Schwabe and Oliver T. Wolf (2009, Journal of Neuroscience) experimentally demonstrated that stress induced before learning could favour habitual responding over action guided by the current value of its outcome. In their task, stressed participants were more likely to continue choosing an action after its associated food reward had been devalued. The finding therefore concerns sensitivity to updated consequences, not a general inability to make decisions.
An effect that depends on the situation
Katrin Starcke and Matthias Brand (2012, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews) provide a selective review of research on stress and decision-making. Their synthesis highlights that effects depend, among other things, on the task and the conditions under which stress occurs. It does not support a simple rule that people under stress systematically take more risks.
The premature conclusion
It would be tempting to conclude that every decision under strain should be suspended, or that every routine deserves suspicion. Yet a validated procedure can make action safer, particularly in the life sciences. The useful distinction is between applying a response whose conditions of validity are met and repeating it without checking whether those conditions still hold. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence does not allow us to transfer
An experimental task involving food rewards reproduces neither regulatory responsibilities nor coordination within an industrial team. The cited review also brings together different stress conditions and tasks: it provides no universal threshold beyond which a decision becomes unreliable. These studies justify vigilance about automatic responses, but do not demonstrate that a break or checklist alone improves business decisions.
A practical check in Basel
As part of SHR’s decision-making programme, a Basel team in pharmaceuticals, life sciences, Rhine logistics or international R&D could test a check on its next non-urgent decisions identified as being made under strain. Before approval, it would record the usual response, the condition that makes it appropriate and a current piece of evidence supporting or challenging that condition, without departing from safety procedures. The indicator would be the proportion of reviewed decisions containing this complete, dated check, with a separate record of choices changed after review. This measure would make the practice verifiable; it would not, by itself, prove an improvement in outcomes. To go further: explore the Decision-making training in Basel in the canton of Basel-Stadt, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Decision-making in Basel
- decision-making
- Basel
- research
- training basel