Shane Parish writes on his blog Farnam Street about defensive decision making. “It wasn’t the best decision we could make,” said one of Parish’s old bosses, “but it was the most defensible.” What she meant was that she wanted to choose option A but ended up choosing option B because it was the defensible default. She realized that if she chose option A and something went wrong, it would be hard to explain because it was outside of normal. On the other hand, if she chose option A and everything went right, she’d get virtually no upside. A good outcome was merely expected, but a bad outcome would have significant consequences for her. The decision she landed on wasn’t the one she would have made if she owned the entire company. Since she didn’t, she wanted to protect her downside. In asymmetrical organizations, defensive decisions like this one protect the person making the decision.
Some decisions place the decision makers in situations where outcomes offer little upside and massive downside. In these cases, it can seem like great outcomes carry a 1% upside, good outcomes are neutral, and poor outcomes carry at least 20% downside—if they don’t get you fired. It’s easy to see why people opt for the default choice in these cases. If you do something that’s different—and thus hard to defend—and it works out, you’ve risked a lot for very little gain. If you do something that’s different and it doesn’t work out, and you might find yourself unemployed.
Doing the safe thing is not the same as doing the right thing. Often, the problem with the safe thing is that there is no growth, no innovation. It’s churning out more of the same. So in the short term, while you may think that the default is a better choice for your job security, in the long game there’s a negative. When you are unwilling to take risks, you stop recognizing opportunities. If you aren’t willing to put yourself out there for 1% gain, how do you grow? After all, the 1% upsides are more common than the 50% upsides. But in either case, if you become afraid of downside, then what level of risk would be acceptable? It’s not that choosing the default makes you a bad person. But a lifetime of opting for the default, limits your opportunities and potential.
When I apply this to investing world, it probably means not buying stocks that are popular but identifying the stocks that are overlooked by most investors. It may be safe to not do anything when markets are going down but it may be better to buy stocks where you are convinced about the long term future. It may be safe to buy large liquid companies that are part of indices but it may be better to make an attempt to identify small companies that may become large successful companies a few years later.
Invest in yourself
Are you interested in learning more about investing & trading? Join our community of 20,000+ learners who have benefited from our online courses. We would also recommend signing up for news and updates using the form below so you can be notified of any events or workshops we host in the near future.