IA on the job: how many options should a client see?
An assistant can generate variations on an offer, compile a product selection or prepare several service configurations. For a team manager, the question is specific: does presenting more choice help the client decide, or transfer a poorly structured comparison task to them?
What the literature establishes
Sheena S. Iyengar and Mark R. Lepper (2000, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) showed across several experiments that an extensive choice could attract more interest without encouraging action. Depending on the situation studied, smaller sets encouraged purchasing or motivation to complete a task. These findings distinguish two objectives often conflated in commercial uses of AI: attracting interest and facilitating a decision.
An effect that is less general than it appears
Benjamin Scheibehenne, Rainer Greifeneder and Peter M. Todd (2010, Journal of Consumer Research) re-examined choice overload in a meta-analysis. They found an average effect close to zero, alongside substantial variation between studies. Their finding does not mean that overload does not exist, but that the number of options alone is insufficient to predict its consequences.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that AI should be instructed to present only a shortlist. Yet the cited research supports neither a universally optimal number nor the systematic removal of alternatives. A shorter list can make comparison easier while excluding an option that matters to the client: the managerial task also involves deciding what must remain accessible. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot establish
These studies do not examine offers generated by generative AI in Ticino businesses. They therefore cannot establish that a personalised catalogue or an AI-assisted commercial proposal will produce the same effects. In practice, changing the number of options, their order and their explanations simultaneously would make it impossible to identify what actually helped the client.
A practical check in Lugano
Within SHR — Swiss Human Resources’ « IA on the job » programme, an exercise in Lugano could compare two Italian-language versions of the same offer, using identical criteria and explanations but different numbers of immediately visible options, with the remainder still accessible. Depending on the business, the material would concern a banking service unrelated to investments, a fashion selection, a trading offer or a quotation from an Italian-speaking family SME, initially using fictional cases validated by practitioners. With versions assigned randomly, the measure would be the proportion of participants able to choose an option and correctly explain its associated trade-off, using an assessment framework defined before the trial. Decision time and requests for clarification would supplement this result: a shorter selection would be retained only if it supports an informed decision, not merely a quick answer. To go further: explore the AI on the Job training in Lugano in the canton of Ticino, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: AI on the Job in Lugano
- ai on the job
- Lugano
- research
- training lugano