Are you a maximiser or a satisficer?

Do you meticulously weigh all available options, striving to achieve the best possible outcome? Or are you content with solutions that meet your criteria and are deemed "good enough"?

Maximisers, as coined by psychologist Barry Schwartz, are individuals who tirelessly pursue the best possible outcome in their decisions. They meticulously analyse options, seeking to maximize utility and satisfaction. In contrast, satisficers, a concept introduced by Herbert Simon, opt for solutions that meet their criteria and are "good enough."

From an evolutionary standpoint, both maximization and satisficing strategies have adaptive significance. Maximization may have evolved as a mechanism to secure the best possible resources and opportunities, enhancing survival and reproductive success. On the other hand, satisficing conserves cognitive resources and minimizes risk, allowing individuals to make efficient decisions in dynamic environments.

Now, consider the scenario of investing in the stock market. A maximiser may meticulously research various stocks, analysing historical performance, market trends, and expert opinions to identify the best investment opportunity. Despite making an informed decision, the maximiser may experience anxiety and regret if the chosen stock underperforms or if a better option emerges later. In contrast, a satisficer may set clear investment criteria, such as diversification and risk tolerance, and select a portfolio that meets these criteria without exhaustive analysis. The satisficer may feel content with their decision, focusing on the overall portfolio performance rather than fixating on individual stock outcomes.

Ultimately, the emotional impact of decision-making differs between maximisers and satisficers. 
Maximisers may make objectively good decisions but end up feeling dissatisfied or overwhelmed by the constant pursuit of perfection. Conversely, satisficers make decisions that meet their needs and standards, leading to feelings of contentment and fulfilment. 

So what's best? It's a question I often think about, especially when I have to make decisions, big or small. Should I carefully think about every option to get the best outcome? Or is it okay to be happy with what's good enough? Honestly, I'm not sure. But maybe there's something to be said for doing a little bit of both. Trying hard to make the most important decisions right, while being okay with just okay for everything else. It's a bit tricky, but maybe that's how we find happiness in the choices we make.