Choice Architecture
3 April 2008 at 1:21 pm stevphel 2 comments
| Steve Phelan |
Interesting article by Thaler and Sunstein in the LA Times on “choice architecture” and the concept of “libertarian paternalism”:
the organization of the context in which people make decisions. Choice architects are everywhere. If you design the ballot that voters use to choose candidates, you are a choice architect. If you are a doctor and must describe the alternative treatments available to a patient, you are a choice architect. If you design the form that new employees fill out to enroll in the company healthcare plan, you are a choice architect. If you are a parent, describing possible educational options to your son or daughter, you are a choice architect. If you are a salesperson, you are a choice architect (but you already knew that).
AND
The libertarian aspect of the approach lies in the straightforward insistence that, in general, people should be free to do what they like. They should be permitted to opt out of arrangements they dislike, and even make a mess of their lives if they want to. The paternalistic aspect acknowledges that it is legitimate for choice architects to try to influence people’s behavior in order to make their lives longer, healthier and better.
Hmmm….is this freedom (of choice)? How would we build a practice of choice architecture?
Entry filed under: Former Guest Bloggers, Institutions, Management Theory.
2 Comments Add your own
Leave a comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
Organizations and Markets 
1.
David Hoopes | 3 April 2008 at 8:24 pm
Pretty unfair description of Libertarians. Well part of it. People should be free to “make a mess of their lives.” I for one would rather mess up my own life as opposed to having some reporter from the LA Times (or some committee) do it for me. But, do Libertarians argue that anyone can do whatever they want? Or, that individuals can decide for themselves better than the government.
2.
Phil soucheray | 16 September 2008 at 12:19 pm
I have not read the LA Times article, but I’ve read the book “Nudge.” At its core it seems to be a polemic in favor of a clearly defined philosophy of allowing consumers the liberty of making their own choice, while recognizing that how humans choose is influenced by social mores, peer pressure and simply by how a choice is presented. It also argues for the right of institutions to leverage those influences in order to “nudge” people to make better choices. The standard for what constitutes the better choice in most domains is generally determined by the individual, science, economic common sense or an accepted common good. Protection against abuses depends on dissemination of really good information and the power of public relations. The greater the transparency about a choice process, the greater benefit to the institution.