To be described as an intuitive decision maker is a major compliment. To be described as an impulsive one is not. To be described as an intuitive decision maker implies that you can size up a situation, apply past experience and accumulated knowledge, and decide very quickly on an appropriate course of action. To be described as impulsive implies that you need to satisfy your immediate cravings without thinking about the consequences. To be described as an intuitive decision maker means that people can have confidence in your leadership. To be described as impulsive means that people should avoid your leadership like the plague.
But what really defines a person as one type of decision maker or the other? A cynic can be forgiven for thinking that the decision’s outcome retroactively determines a person’s decision style. Successful outcomes come from intuitive decision makers. Failed outcomes come from impulsive ones.
Decision makers themselves have been described, depending on the circumstances, as both intuitive and impulsive. For example, General George Custer has been lauded as one of the most courageous and intuitive cavalry commanders in the Civil War, especially for his actions on the third day of the battle of Gettysburg. It was Custer, at the head of the Michigan cavalry brigade, who assessed quickly that Confederate General Jeb Stuart’s attack in the back of the Union lines was of critical strategic importance (with the potential to turn the battle in the Confederacy’s favor). His quick thinking and decision to charge into Stuart’s lines arguably staved off defeat and solidified the Union victory that day. People assumed that Custer’s decisions were the result of his fine-tuned intuition.
Yet the same Custer has been pilloried for his decision at the Little Big Horn where on June 25, 1876 he led over 300 soldiers of the 7th Cavalry, including himself, to their deaths. For his actions that day he has been called arrogant, self-centered, glory seeking, and, of course, impulsive.
So what type of decision maker was he? Did his intuitive style deteriorate after the Civil War? Interestingly, U.S. Army Major Jonathan T. Neumann, in his master’s thesis, argues that based on the information Custer had at the time, as well as the general assumptions about American Indian fighting tactics, the decision to attack the Sioux Indian encampment could be justified. According to his analysis, Custer’s intuition was based on faulty premises.
What then really differentiates an intuitive decision maker from an impulsive one? An impulsive decision maker is driven by his desires and cravings and decides to act upon these feelings despite the absence of time pressure. He also does not think about the long-term ramifications of his actions, or, if he does, he downplays the probability of undesirable outcomes.
An intuitive decision maker is driven by time pressure to make a quick decision. But far from being motivated to satisfy a personal desire, he is motivated to select the best course of action. Relying on his own past learning and experience, he quickly recognizes patterns and chooses an appropriate course of action. Although this process happens at rapid speed he nonetheless considers the future consequences of his actions. When time allows, he is able to consider these potential future consequences in an even more systematic manner.
The importance of considering possible outcomes and consequences is even more evident in strategic decision making when the pressure has lessened. That is when decision makers must imagine the outcomes from different decisions and, as economists argue, consider the “opportunity costs” of each decision.
The importance of carefully considering one’s decisions and thinking about their outcomes and consequences is underscored in this week’s parsha. Regarding the sin offering of Aharon and his surviving sons, the Torah states (10:16): “that Moshe ‘darosh doreish’ (inquired intensively) about it…” The Reisha Rav, Rav Aharon Levine, Hy”d, explains that the Torah, through this unique word usage, is instructing us to carefully consider the consequences of our actions before we make a decision. Commenting on the gemara in Kiddushin (30a) that states that the words “darosh doreish” constitute the midpoint of the Torah with respect to the word count, Rav Levine homiletically suggests that this reminds us that “half” the battle to observe the Torah is won by evaluating our actions in light of their possible outcomes. The worst results occur when we act impulsively, rushing to satisfy our desires without properly weighing the variables involved in the decision and without envisioning the possible consequences of our actions.