I recently needed to make a decision about tires, and I was paralyzed by all the options. I decided to take some time to explore my feelings about my paralysis of choice. In thinking and researching, I came across a TED video from [[Barry Schwartz]] which explores the idea of "The Paradox of Choice". Barry has also written a book on the topic, which I haven't read, but may consider picking up. While I'll reserve judgment on some of Barry's ideas, I do think he makes some interesting points. Barry says that there are four main reasons that choice makes people miserable: 1. Regret and anticipated regret 2. Opportunity costs 3. Escalation of expectations 4. Self-blame I'd like to explore each in a bit more detail. # Regret and Anticipated Regret The next time you go to your local grocery store. Take a look at all the options. There are countless canned goods, different sizes shapes and brands of pasta—some are even imported from Italy. Need some toothpaste? Do you like your toothpaste to focus on freshening your breath or whitening your teeth? Perhaps you don't want paste at all, maybe you prefer a gel? What flavor do you like? How about milk, I'm sure you need some milk, but perhaps 2% or skim milk? Or possibly you are lactose intoleratant and want to get Lactaid milk? Maybe you don't do dairy; so why not try some soy milk or nut milk? All these choices open us up to potential regret. We only have so much bandwidth to tackle the increasing number of decisions and the increasing optionality that comes into our lives. With so many options to choose from, it becomes more difficult to choose at all. The choices cause paralysis of choice. A study of over 1 million employees at over 2000 different workplaces showed that for every 10 mutual funds an employer offered, the rate of participation in the program went down by 2%.[^1] With so many funds to choose from, the choice is hard, so most people put off making the decision. Perhaps in perpetuity. # Opportunity Costs If we do choose, we also tend to be less satisfied with the choice we have made because we are left to wonder if we made the right choice. We think about the opportunity costs, the things we could have had if we chose a different option. This makes us less satisfied with our final choice. The more optionality, the more opportunities there are for us to perceive our actual choice in a negative light. # Escalation of Expectations Optionality does open the door to making a choice that truly is better, it allows us to escalate our expectations about how good a product can be. It enables better individual product fit, but ultimately it can make us feel worse. > [!Quote] > With all of the options available, my expectations went up. > — Barry Schwartz > # Self-blame Consumer optionality has led to a better overall product fit, but has reduced our expose to true delight as we continue searching for better. What choice do we have, the choice was ours, so if the product isn't right, perhaps we picked the wrong product. # My Conclusions as of 9:27 AM on September, 18th 2024. I am still working through some complicated feelings about the paradox of choice. I like having choices. As a scientist and analytical thinker, I appreciate the optionality that allows me to get a product that better fits my needs. However, I choose to think about these decisions as, "best for now" or best under the current set of constraints. As someone who is interested in product development and diagnostics, I see a challenge: How do we, as product professionals, offer adequate choice to keep up with escalating expectations while making products that are opinionated enough to spark delight and prevent people from going into a regret spiral leading to self blame? As product managers and leaders, we need to take responsibility for our products. They should have a clear vision, user requirements that tie to detailed user personas and use environments. Critically, this needs to be anchored by the realities of market size and existing market landscape. Great product ideas die when they fail to account for the realities of the existing market, and try to be everything to everyone. When considering the market, and optionality, it helps to consider the customer's goal. In the consumer product world, customers will almost always indicate that they prefer more options. However, "how many choices they prefer change depending on whether they intend to use an item for pleasure or to meet a functional need."[^2] When the customer is motivated by pleasure believe that what pleases them differs from that other what pleases others. They want as many options as possible. However, when the consumer is trying to meet a basic need utilitarian need, they are satisfied with a smaller assortment of options. ## Case Study From Harvard Business Review Article[^2]: > In another exercise, 286 participants were asked to imagine that they owned two cars: one they drove for pleasure on weekends and one they used to commute to work. One group was told that they would be choosing a new paint color for their commuter car, and the other that they would be choosing a new color for their pleasure vehicle. Both groups were then asked to what extent they agreed with this statement: “I believe my preferences for colors are unique and different from others’ color preferences.” Then they were asked to gauge, on a seven-point scale, from “not at all difficult” to “very difficult,” how hard they thought it would be to find a color to match their preferences. Finally, they were asked how many paint colors — from one to 50 — they would like to see in order to make their purchase decision. > > As expected, participants in the pleasure-car group wanted a larger assortment of paint colors, on average, than those in the commuter-car group. They also perceived their preferences as differing significantly from those of other people than did the commuter-car group. And they anticipated greater difficulty finding a product that matched their preferences. These results indicate that what drives the choice of assortment size is how unique consumers perceive their preferences to be compared with those of other people. ## Researchers and Clinical Laboratories I think the case study shared, although related to a wholly different market, illistrates the challenges we have at different phases of clinical adoption of a new technology. Researchers tend to want the fun pleasure "car" with all the bells and whistles. In contrast, the margins on laboratory tests are such that clinical labs value a smaller set of features that are reliable and affordable and that allow them to deliver critical results quickly. ## Trending Toward Medicine The effects of the paradox of choice have made their way into the clinic as well. Doctors present patients with a series of options but put the final decision in the patient's hands. As product development professionals, we are used to having lots of the nobs and levers we can adjust to shape our products. I would argue that if we pass on too much of this to the end users and customers we increase the risk of use errors. This is bad [[On Usability|usability]], and it is bad for our products. It is convenient to transfer the risks and burden associated with the decision, but unless health care professionals (HCPs) and patients are well-educated on cutting edge translational medicine they may end up making worse decisions if we do not strive for simple. As professionals in the medical diagnostics industry, we should strive for good experiences that minimize risk and that are delightful. When considering features it is always useful to ask: 1. What could go wrong? 2. What do we need? These two questions are just the starting point to mitigating risks in our designs. However, they are a useful tool. [^1]: [The paradox of choice | Barry Schwartz | TED - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM) [^2]: [How Many Versions of a Product Do Consumers Really Want?](https://hbr.org/2018/06/how-many-versions-of-a-product-do-consumers-really-want)