Cognitive biases impede effective decision-making in organizational change
ROI comes from how fast you build. Most leaders don’t miss this because they lack intelligence. They miss it because they assume that reaching a goal, any goal, automatically makes the journey worth it. It doesn’t. What matters is how much value you unlock, and when.
Dan French, CEO of Consider Solutions, is very clear on this point. Companies often focus heavily on the projected outcome of a transformation project without properly factoring in how long it takes to get there. That mindset kills momentum and undermines returns. Future value loses meaning when it’s delivered too late. Time has a multiplier, or a reducer, on actual success.
Here’s what this looks like in real numbers. According to French, securing a $10 million gain in profit and loss improvements in three months is more valuable than waiting 18 months to realize $50 million. Why? Because delayed returns depreciate. Capital, time, and competitive angles lost in those extra 15 months could be the difference between category leadership and playing catch-up.
So, if you’re allocating capital, resources, or attention to a strategic initiative, don’t just ask what the outcome is. Ask how long it takes to get there. That delta between potential and reality is where competitive advantages are won or lost.
Ten specific cognitive biases hinder transformation efforts
Bias is part of being human, but unchecked bias in leadership decisions is dangerous. And during transformation, it’s dangerous and expensive.
Dan French maps out ten of the most disruptive cognitive biases we all deal with: confirmation bias (locking onto data that reinforces our views), in-group bias (listening only to “our team”), self-serving bias (credit-taking and blame-shifting), availability bias (judging based on what’s front of mind), fundamental attribution bias (blaming people, not systems), hindsight bias (seeing inevitability in outcomes), anchoring bias (getting stuck on one initial piece of information), optimism/pessimism bias (overplaying good or bad outcomes), the halo effect (overestimating based on one quality), and the status quo effect (resisting change because it’s unfamiliar). These things filter how we interpret data, drive change, and assess performance.
French warns that these biases don’t just show up, they dominate when we’re under pressure. That’s especially true in transformation projects, where stress runs high and the stakes are even higher. The most dangerous part? These biases often hide behind what looks like smart decision-making: obsessing over KPIs, doubling down on existing processes, or favoring the familiar team.
Most executives pride themselves on thinking clearly, but when KPIs become the compass rather than just feedback tools, metrics start driving the mission instead of evaluating it. The call to action is simple: recognize these mental traps and commit to decisions based on reality, not assumption.
C-suite leaders need to lead bias mitigation, not just outsource it to consultants or software dashboards. You want transformation that drives real return? Start by driving clarity at the top.
Effective change requires focusing first on purpose and challenges
In organizational transformation, most leaders move too fast to the “How.” They start designing solutions before they fully understand the actual problems. That leads to wasted resources, misaligned teams, and results that miss the mark. Dan French, CEO of Consider Solutions, challenges this backwards approach. He argues that transformation efforts are much more effective when you clarify the “Why” and “What” first, then move to the “How.”
This is about aiming correctly before you execute. You can move at speed, but only after establishing direction based on reality, not instinct or optics. Start by understanding stakeholder concerns, process inefficiencies, and hidden blockers. Bring in operational leaders early, not as late-stage implementers, but as partners in defining challenges. The people doing the work often know the real problem better than the people planning strategy.
French also makes a critical point about metrics. Many companies are measuring what’s easy, not what matters. You cannot manage what you’ve misdefined. If the KPIs are misaligned to actual outcomes, you’re not tracking progress, you’re measuring noise. Make sure the data you’re collecting reflects the business goals you expect to drive. The question isn’t “Are we hitting the target?” It’s “Is this the target that advances the mission?”
Transformation without alignment ends up being expensive movement. If you want impact, precision must come before speed.
Overcoming biases demands intentional behavior change and discipline
Bias doesn’t go away just by being aware of it. It takes focused effort, disciplined action, to rewire decision patterns. Dan French emphasizes that leaders need to change behaviors, not just ideas, if they want meaningful improvement in how their organizations execute change. You don’t get better decision-making through a one-time workshop or a memo. You get there with consistent, deliberate behavior over time.
French is specific: forming new habits takes between 21 and 90 days of committed effort. That’s not a theoretical guideline. It’s backed by behavioral science. And those habits must be tightly defined. It’s not enough to say “make better decisions.” You have to identify which decisions need to change, what specific actions will support them, and what old behaviors need to stop.
Discipline is key. No delegation. No shortcuts. The executive team must hold themselves accountable first. Without a clear rhythmic cadence, even the best strategies fall into old patterns of thinking.
High-performance organizations don’t rely on spontaneous brilliance. They rely on well-reinforced behavioral systems. When leaders take responsibility for consistently challenging their own biases, they set the tone for the entire organization. That’s how cultural change becomes sustainable, not aspirational.
Inclusive dialogue and diverse perspectives help counteract bias
When decisions are made in isolation, bias goes unchecked. It reinforces blind spots and creates fragile strategies. Dan French, CEO of Consider Solutions, makes it clear, inviting multiple viewpoints into the decision-making process isn’t just a nice-to-have. It’s essential for eliminating embedded bias and surfacing better solutions.
Executives often rely too heavily on a tight circle of trusted advisors or internal teams. That’s where the risk starts. Without deliberate inclusion of broader operational voices, organizations miss critical context, insights held by people closer to the actual problems. By bringing in diverse interpretations, you create the conditions for friction that actually improves thinking. It isn’t about consensus. It’s about awareness and perspective.
French emphasizes that this process should begin early, not after plans are drafted, but before assumptions become directives. It’s also not only about roles or job titles. Leaders need to actively create space for points of view that challenge the status quo. That includes stakeholders across departments, geographies, and functions. The goal is not to slow down decisions, it’s to ensure they’re grounded in reality, not filtered through a limited lens.
When inclusive input becomes part of how decisions are made, not a formality but a meaningful step, you reduce the risk of repetition, misdiagnosis, and overconfidence. For companies serious about executing transformation successfully and at scale, this is not optional. It’s operationally necessary. And the responsibility for setting that standard starts at the top.
Key takeaways for leaders
- Cognitive bias undermines ROI evaluation: Leaders should factor in value delivery speed when assessing transformation strategies, as delayed returns diminish actual ROI and strategic impact.
- Unaddressed biases distort decision-making: Executives must actively recognize and mitigate ten core biases, especially under stress, as they often skew judgments and lead to flawed transformation initiatives.
- Start with purpose before designing solutions: Leaders should focus on clearly identifying the root challenges and business context before prioritizing solutions, ensuring alignment across teams and metrics that matter.
- Behavior change drives results: Long-term decision improvement requires discipline and a clearly defined behavioral shift plan, including what actions to adopt, what to eliminate, and how to stay accountable daily.
- Include diverse voices to surface blind spots: Executives should proactively engage a wider range of operational perspectives early in decision processes to reduce groupthink, reveal hidden issues, and improve overall solution strength.
