naturalistic decision making and the RPD model

Isenberg (1984) - senior managers making decisions

use naturalistic decision making

Orasanu & Connolly (1993)

decision theory doesn’t explain how experts make decisions irl - rely on experience, intuition and context

RPD model - simple match

situation recognised - decision maker understands goals, notices cues, forms expectations, chooses obvious action

RPD model - developing a course of action

situation is familiar but not instantly clear - decision maker imagines how action may play out, modifies typical response if needed, doesnt compare multiple options, runs mental simulation to test robustness

RPD model - complex strategy

situation is unfamiliar or flawed - decision maker reassesses situation, simulates and adjusts one option, doesnt weigh multiple alternative

key points of RPD

uses mental simulation (one option at a time), focus on situational assessment, relies on expertise, aim for ‘good enough’ option, decision makers stay ready for action not passive, blends heuristics

what heuristics does RPD blend

representativeness - match to known patterns, availability - recall similar past cases, simulation - imagine outcomes before acting

criticisms of RPD

limited testing (not widely validated), inconsistent versions (lacks standardisation), narrow scope (mostly studied decisions in few decisions contexts)

what is RPD

a descriptive theory of decision making, describing how people make decisions naturally

dangers of RPD - reason 1

adopting process to early - knowledge insufficient, or domain does not require it, or the situation has changed in significant ways

dangers of RPD - reason 2

managers use simple RPD - do what we did last time if it workers - could be inappropriate, open to error and bias