The first number: what research establishes about anchoring
In Genève, a proposed price in private banking, a budget allocation in an international organisation, a quotation in luxury watchmaking or a commodity trading offer can become the starting point for a decision. The managerial question is specific: how can we check whether an initial amount influences an estimate beyond the information it actually provides?
What the literature establishes
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman (1974, Science) describe anchoring: an initial value can influence an estimate even when it comes from an arbitrary procedure. In the tasks presented, estimates remain influenced by that starting point. For management, the issue is therefore not only the reliability of the number received, but also its influence on the judgement subsequently formed.
Expertise does not guarantee independence
Gregory B. Northcraft and Margaret A. Neale (1987, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes) studied property valuations by varying the listing price in the information given to participants. The assessments of both professionals and amateurs were influenced by that price. This study shows that experience and substantial information do not suffice to guarantee an estimate independent of the amount presented.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that every price or budget should be hidden before a decision is made. That would confuse a potentially misleading influence with information that may be relevant: an offer can also reveal market conditions or another party’s constraints. The useful distinction is between what the amount allows us to learn and what it leads us to assume without justification. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What these findings cannot promise
These studies do not directly measure anchoring in Genève’s private banks, international organisations, watchmaking businesses or commodity trading firms. Nor do they demonstrate that producing an independent estimate beforehand eliminates the effect. Asking teams to “watch out for biases” is therefore neither a verified safeguard nor an indicator of decision quality.
A practical check in Genève
Within SHR’s “Decision-making” programme, a local exercise could use fictional cases tailored to the sector, with two versions differing only in the proposed amount and an explicit statement that this amount is arbitrary and provides no information about the value to be estimated. Randomly assigning participants to the versions, collecting individual estimates before any discussion and comparing the difference between the means would provide a measure of sensitivity to the number presented. Repeating the exercise with other cases, recording an estimate before revealing the amount, would allow an examination of whether this procedure reduces the difference, without confusing less anchoring with greater accuracy. To go further: explore the Decision-making training in Geneva, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Decision-making in Geneva
- decision-making
- Geneva
- research
- training geneva