Power and its impacts on people’s decision-making

According to Dr Conor Wynn, there is a lack of use of data and other evidence when people in power make decisions about large infrastructure projects. This may be due to a number of reasons, including lack of time, resources, and self interest.

Using some famous examples, including the Sydney Opera House, the Olympic Games, and the most recent cancellation of the 2026 Commonwealth Games, Conor explains some of the key reasons as to why large, glamorous infrastructure projects run over budget due to poor early decision-making and planning.

How can we improve better decision-making in positions of power, and in particular, politics?

Grab a coffee, press play, and enjoy this episode of Pocket Change, Power, Decisions, and Behaviour:

‍

Pocket Change is a series of pocket-size videos about a key aspect of behaviour change.  Each episode features a BehaviourWorks Australia Researcher explaining their area of expertise in a clear and simple manner.  

‍

Transcript

GEOFF
Hi everyone. This month I'm speaking to Conor Wynn, and Connor's research is about how power influences decision making and behaviour. Most of us are used to large projects blowing out in terms of cost, but you would argue that that's not just an accident, that's kind of built into the decision making issues we have at that level?

CONOR
It is, yeah. And it's an important issue because it's not just we're not just limited to the project management sphere, because big infrastructure projects affect us alL, it's because of the way people in power make decisions.

GEOFF
What is the issue when it comes to politicians or people in power making decisions about large infrastructure projects?

CONOR
The issue is, and this is a journey for me as well, which was fascinating part of my PhD, but one of the things I found is that senior people don't use much data at all for decision making.

GEOFF
So with politicians, and I can kind of understand that they might not be able to absorb all that information, but they must have people who work for them that do.

CONOR
They do. Exactly. Yes. So one of the ways politicians deal with the fact that they don't have time and, lack of time and issue complexity are big determinants of whether you use what's called heuristics or, you know, shortcuts to make decisions. One of the ways, one of the heuristics they use is - I get somebody I trust, I'll outsource it to them. She'll go through it with a fine, fine tooth comb and tell me what I need to do about it.

The issue is that those people are also flat chat and they're spinning lots of different plates. But one of the heuristics that people will use is, particularly politicians, is self-interest, which is like, I've got a year to go to, the next election, is the community clamouring for this?  And so the answer to that was no. Okay. Well, then what would be much resistance to this? This policy?

So, for instance, this policy in particular was looking at time of use and distance traveled rather than the standard postage stamp approach. And so it would create, or it would have created winners and losers in the electorate.

So if you are an MP and you're 40 kms out from the CBD and you've got people commuting into the city, you are like, they're going to be annoyed with you. So if that's your perspective, rationally, fine. But for me, no, I can't do this.

GEOFF
In a way that is a type of rational logic - that's the real politik situation.

CONOR
Well, you're right. So, so there is I think there is there is a phrase called ecological rationality, which is a fancy way of saying it's rational in this situation.  Nobody's irrational in themselves. It's just that if you took a business case, in this case, which which would have reduced traffic potentially significantly, particularly around the CBD, where we got congestion and and pollution issues, that just would not happen.  In fact that the Premier, he dismissed it about 18 months ago very quickly and it's not going to happen.

GEOFF
So there are great examples of cost overruns and politics that look good on paper; the Sydney Opera House.

CONOR
Sydney Opera House. We held the record at one stage and we were 1400 times the original budget.

GEOFF
The Olympic Games?

CONOR
The Olympic Games, almost every Olympic Games is between 30 and 50% of what they originally pitched for. So, those big kind of glamor projects have a terrible track record.

GEOFF
Recently the Victorian Premier has had to cancel the Commonwealth Games. So the idea that the Commonwealth Games is a money losing venture is not new, but actually pulling the plug at that late stage is.

CONOR
That's very unusual. What's often the case is, is that political decision makers get locked in or they get, they get hemmed in because they've they've committed to do something. And so as the costs escalate and they escalate for for a number of different reasons, one of which is the original business case was was highly unlikely and highly optimistic. What you get a kind of over commitment or a sunk cost commitment, which is; well, hang on, we were kind of halfway through this. So it's almost it's almost cheaper to keep going than it is to unwind that. And then what do you do with a half built stadium, you know?

So that's very difficult and really unusual for politicians to go, no, I'm not doing this. I mean, I'm not across the politics of it, but from a major project perspective, that was really unusual. I mean, I actually think it was a good thing.

GEOFF
If we are prone, or politicians and leaders are prone to making irrational decisions, talk about resistance and the idea that there could be people that would help them make better decisions.

CONOR
So one of the things you don't want to do is be Robinson Crusoe when it comes to pushing back. There are some short term incentives, such as the next electoral cycle which will drive perverse behaviour. In order to stop that, I think what we need is more resistance. But you do not want to be the whistle blower. I know that's not going to sound well, but the track record for being a whistle blower is not very good because you become socially isolated.

You get under huge pressure, your health suffers, relationships suffer, your your employment generally takes a hit. It's a bad place to be. And in fact, people in power want that because then you then become the the public execution. You then get hung up as if to say - if any of you want to resist, this is what happens.

GEOFF
And so in terms of changing behaviour, in terms of getting better behaviour, what do we do in terms of either training our politicians or those who work for them to say there's a better way of making decisions in the long term?

CONOR
Well, what a politician ought to do, and that's a great point you make, if we're training politicians, we ought to train them to look for more resistance, not less.

GEOFF
Okay. In a way that's saying I don't want to hear bad news, but I should look for bad news?  

CONOR
Absolutely. And you should deliberately set it up so you have somebody who can go who can who can call you into a room and go "Mate, no", and they'd go straight to the board or to the CEO and tap them on the shoulder and they go, "Look, I'm throwing a red flag on this".

GEOFF
And in the end, it does require a type of politician who is brave enough to ask for bad news or resistance.

CONOR
Yeah, I think so. There's resistance in two ways. So if we had leaders who are searching for contradictory evidence or who are being counselled by people who had their long term interests at heart, I think we would get better decisions. What they don't need is a cheer squad. They actually need people counterbalancing saying "this is a bad idea and here's why". And also, there's much said about psychological safety. That's a difficult area, but basically he, the politician, he or she needs to set up a group whereby the people feel comfortable bringing the bad news and telling them what's what should be fixed.

GEOFF
So are people sometimes set up to fail and to be reset, and to be set up to fail and to be reset?

CONOR
It happens, happens all the time. I mean, it was a bit of a joke in the projects community around the NBN some years ago. Like most people got a phone call to go, "Oh, we're getting rid of all those those guys, they were hopeless, but we want you to come in and pick it up." and you go or 'No, I don't think so.'

And so there's the political will to be seen to tidy up and to fix it. But in each case you get that same dynamic, which is we're only going to put up what we think we can get away with, not what the project actually needs. And so it's an inability to tell the truth at its most fundamental, so you get an instrumental use of language and business cases which is; I'll put up a business case and I'll put up a proposition which will get me started at least, rather than being frank and putting out a business case, which is what you genuinely think will happen. And most politicians would say, 'Well, you're being naive'. And I would go, 'Well, not in the long term'.

GEOFF
Conor Wynn, thank you very much.

CONOR
Thank you, Jeff.

‍

‍