Analysis paralysis

"Overthinking" redirects here. For other uses, see Overthinking (disambiguation).

The Thinker

Analysis paralysis (or paralysis by analysis) describes an individual or group process when overanalyzing or overthinking a situation can cause forward motion or decision-making to become "paralyzed", meaning that no solution or course of action is decided upon. A situation may be deemed as too complicated and a decision is never made, due to the fear that a potentially larger problem may arise. A person may desire a perfect solution, but may fear making a decision that could result in error, while on the way to a better solution. Equally, a person may hold that a superior solution is a short step away, and stall in its endless pursuit, with no concept of diminishing returns. On the opposite end of the time spectrum is the phrase extinct by instinct, which is making a fatal decision based on hasty judgment or a gut reaction.

Analysis paralysis is when the fear of either making an error, or foregoing a superior solution, outweighs the realistic expectation or potential value of success in a decision made in a timely manner. This imbalance results in suppressed decision-making in an unconscious effort to preserve existing options. An overload of options can overwhelm the situation and cause this "paralysis", rendering one unable to come to a conclusion. It can become a larger problem in critical situations where a decision needs to be reached, but a person is not able to provide a response fast enough, potentially causing a bigger issue than they would have, had they made a decision.

History

The basic idea has been expressed through narrative a number of times. In one "Aesop's fable" that is recorded even before Aesop's time, The Fox and the Cat, the fox boasts of "hundreds of ways of escaping" while the cat has "only one". When they hear the hounds approaching, the cat scampers up a tree while "the fox in his confusion was caught up by the hounds". The fable ends with the moral, "Better one safe way than a hundred on which you cannot reckon". Related concepts are expressed by the Centipede's dilemma, how unconscious activity is disrupted by conscious thought of it, and by the tale of Buridan's ass, a paradox of rational decision with equal options.

In Shakespeare's Hamlet, the main character, Prince Hamlet, is often said to have a mortal flaw of thinking too much, such that his youth and vital energy are "sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought". Neema Parvini explores some of Hamlet's key decisions in the chapter "'And Reason Panders Will': Another Look at Hamlet's Analysis Paralysis".

Voltaire popularized an old Italian proverb in French in the 1770s of which an English variant is "Perfect is the enemy of good". The meaning of "The perfect is the enemy of the good" is that one might never complete a task if one has decided not to stop until it is perfect: completing the project well is made impossible by striving to complete it perfectly.

"Analysis, paralysis" appeared together in an 1803 pronouncing dictionary and later editions stating how those words are pronounced similarly. The usage of rhyming words can make aphorisms sound more truthful and be more memorable by their usage of the rhyme-as-reason effect and ode mnemonics.

In 1928 at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, Reverend C. Leslie Glenn, National Secretary for College Work, spoke that the religious collegiate world was at risk of "paralysis by analysis" from being too speculative instead of definitive, needing real work instead of investigations.

During World War II, Winston Churchill, after hearing that the landing craft designers were spending the majority of their time arguing over design changes, sent this message: "The maxim 'Nothing avails but perfection' may be spelt shorter: 'Paralysis.'"

In 1956, Charles R. Schwartz wrote the article "The Return-on-Investment Concept as a Tool for Decision Making" in Changing Patterns And Concepts In Management stating, "We will do less guessing; avoid the danger of becoming extinct by instinct; and, by the adoption of one uniform evaluation guide, escape succumbing to paralysis by analysis."

In 1965, H. Igor Ansoff wrote the book Corporate Strategy: An Analytic Approach to Business Policy for Growth and Expansion. He used the phrase "paralysis by analysis" in reference to those who used the approach to excess. Ansoff had referenced Schwartz's paper in couple of his papers.

In a paper published in 1970, based on a speech in 1969 and other works, Silver and Hecker wrote:

The Duke group has used the term "analysis-paralysis" to point out that, if we wait until we have completely answered all the questions and solved all of the problems before training the personnel we need, we will never reach a solution. The insistent demands for further study and extensive evaluation suggested by some may only be a defense by those who do not wish to change or those who fear change.

The Oxford English Dictionary says that the earliest uses of "analysis paralysis" found in The Times were in the 1970s.

Software development

In software development, analysis paralysis typically manifests itself through the Waterfall model with exceedingly long phases of project planning, requirements gathering, program design and data modeling, which can create little or no extra value by those steps and risk many revisions. When extended over too long a timeframe, such processes tend to emphasize the organizational (i.e., bureaucratic) aspect of the software project, while detracting from its functional (value-creating) portion.

Analysis paralysis can occur, when there is a lack of experience on the part of workers such as systems analysts, project managers or software developers, and could be due to a rigid and formal organizational culture. However, according to Ram Charan, indecision in businesses is usually the result of not enough people acting or speaking up about the inefficiencies of the company. Analysis paralysis can also arise from extensive experience or expertise, which serves to increase the number of options and considerations that appear at every decision point.

Analysis paralysis is an example of an anti-pattern. Agile software development methodologies explicitly seek to prevent analysis paralysis, by promoting an iterative work cycle that emphasizes working products over product specifications, but requires buy-in from the full project team. In some instances, Agile software development ends up creating additional confusion in the project in the case where iterative plans are made with no intention on having the team following through.

Sports

See also: Choke (sports) and Nervous nineties

Analysis paralysis is a critical problem in athletics. It can be explained in simple terms as "failure to react in response to overthought". A victim of sporting analysis paralysis will frequently think in complicated terms of "what to do next" while contemplating the variety of possibilities, and in doing so exhausts the available time in which to act.

Casual analysis paralysis

There are additional situations in which analysis paralysis can be identified, but in which the phenomenon is often accidental or coincidental.

Personal analysis

Casual analysis paralysis can occur during the process of trying to make personal decisions, if the decisionmaker overanalyzes the circumstance with which they are faced. When this happens, the sheer volume of analysis overwhelms the decisionmaker, weighing them down so much that they feel overwhelmed with the task, unable to make a rational conclusion.

Conversational analysis

Although analysis paralysis can actually occur at any time, regarding any issue in typical conversation, it is particularly likely to occur during elevated, intellectual discussions. During such intellectual discussion, analysis paralysis involves the overanalysis of a specific issue to the point where that issue can no longer be recognized, and the subject of the conversation is lost. Usually, this happens because complex issues (which are often the basis of elevated, intellectual conversation) are intricately connected with various other issues, and the pursuit of these various issues makes logical sense to the participants. Below is an example of how analysis paralysis might affect a conversation about human rights:

1. Human rights
2. China's one child policy
3. Infanticide
4. Moral implications
5. Individualism versus the common good

All of these issues are closely related and each issue brings up yet another related one. The assumption is that, eventually, the analysis will move on so far astray that the initial issue of human rights becomes a sub-issue or is no longer even recognizable to the current topic under discussion.

Games

Games provide a microcosm for decision-making where there can be adversaries, hidden or missing information, random events, complex options, and consequences. In this context, analysis paralysis denotes a state where a player is so overwhelmed by the available moves and their implications that the player's turn takes an inordinate amount of time. This can be compounded in a losing position where the player is exhaustively searching for a win or purposely stalling to prevent officially losing the game. The connotation is often pejorative, implying that the slowing of the game diminished the enjoyment by other players. Some games explicitly add time deadlines (e.g. with a chess clock or egg timer). In chess this slowing of play is referred to as Kotov Syndrome and, in timed chess matches, can result in time trouble. Good game design can reduce the likelihood of analysis paralysis in gameplay. Game design itself can also be susceptible to analysis paralysis.

Preventing and overcoming

‹The template Manual is being considered for merging.› 

There are many ways to help prevent or overcome the logjam of analysis paralysis. There may be many factors contributing to the cause. Lon Roberts breaks down the common definition of "analysis paralysis" into three possibly overlapping conditions of paralysis: analysis process, decision precision, and risk uncertainty. He uses this to give specific actions for each condition. Becky Kane and others give these following suggestions:

Set limits

Set initial constraints (deadline, time, people, money, resources,...) to what you are willing to commit for this plan. Setting deadlines: "Set a 'drop dead' date." "Set a deadline and hold yourself accountable." Limit the amount of info: "Curb your curiosity." "Intentionally limit the amount of information you consume."

Clarify objectives and priorities

Having a clear goal can simplify your decisions and actions for any project. "Know your main objective."

Remember nothing is perfect

"Recognize that the moons will never align."

Take small iterative steps

Agile development and design thinking are two recent movements emphasizing small iterations to discover the problem space. "Approach problems with an iterative mindset." Decide something: "Stair step your decisions." Resorting to Flipism, at least to reveal your preference, can resolve seeming equal choices. Do something: "Start before you feel ready."

Change number of options

Increasing the number of options in the beginning increases the likelihood of including a good solution (Design thinking: divergent thinking, ideation). Decreasing the number of options later simplifies the decision process (Paradox of choice, convergent thinking).

You can Narrow your options in this three step process

1. Out of all your options, randomly focus on two and compare.
2. Keep the best of the two and discard the other.
3. Repeat this process until you are left with just one choice.

Add or remove emotion

Decision making works best with a mix of rational, intuitive and emotional thinking.

Talk about it

Talking with someone can get another viewpoint. This can also help reduce groupthink. "Get a sanity check." "Get out of your own head and talk it out with someone else." It doesn't even have to be a person (see Rubber duck debugging).But make sure that you talk with a right expert only as they would guide you to the right path.

Make your best decision

Decision fatigue can affect or even prevent good decision making. "Structure your day for the decisions that matter most." When you do make your decision, support it. "Make your decision the right one."

Adages

• "Better one safe way than a hundred on which you cannot reckon." — Aesop's The Fox and the Cat
• "The perfect is the enemy of the good." — Voltaire
• "The best thing is to do the right thing; the next best is to do the wrong thing; the worst thing of all things is to stand perfectly still" — Alfred Henry Lewis (on Theodore Roosevelt and politics)
• "The maxim 'Nothing avails but perfection' may be spelt shorter: 'Paralysis.'" — Winston Churchill
• "Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes" — Robert Watson-Watt
• "Better a good decision quickly than the best decision too late." — Harold Geneen

See also

• Bounded rationality
• Buyer's remorse
• Criticism
• Decision fatigue
• Decisional balance
• Existential crisis
• Groupthink
• Information overload
• Obsessive–compulsive personality disorder
• Opportunity cost
• Overchoice
• The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less
• Perfect is the enemy of good
• Perfectionism
• Regret (decision theory)
• Secretary problem
• Thinking, Fast and Slow
• Wicked problem
• Writer's block
• Yips