Mental models in decision-making: we are asking the wrong question

During the TNO Vector symposium, it became clear that speed alone is not the solution. Faster decision-making without improving quality rarely leads to better outcomes. In fact, we run the risk of making the wrong decisions more quickly. The root of the problem lies deeper. In many cases, we are simply asking the wrong question.

Not: how can we accelerate decision-making?
But: why are we not able to reach the necessary collective decisions?

Polarisation blocks the conversation

Polarisation is no longer limited to public debate. In policy and research domains as well, conversations quickly become stuck. Positions harden before the real dialogue begins. Take the debate on car use. As soon as the conversation turns to reducing car use, positions become entrenched. The discussion shifts from substance to positions, leaving little room for a nuanced assessment: where, when and under which circumstances does the car add value in the mobility system, and where does it detract from it? What we see here is not a lack of information or vision, but a clash of mental models.

What we do not make explicit shapes decision-making outcomes

Beneath the surface of decision-making, mental models play a crucial role. These are the assumptions, beliefs, expectations and values that determine how people view an issue. They form an ‘invisible script’ on which choices are based. Because these mental models almost always remain implicit, stakeholders often talk past one another. What is self-evident to one may be unthinkable to another. As a result, discussions are not so much about facts, but about fundamentally different interpretations of reality. This directly affects decision-making. Processes stall, often late in the process and seemingly unexpectedly. In reality, the conflict or missed opportunity was present from the beginning, but was never made explicit.

We miss opportunities

By not paying sufficient attention to mental models, we miss opportunities. First, we limit our solution space. If we reason only within the boundaries of existing beliefs, alternative directions remain out of sight.

Second, decision-making becomes vulnerable. Without explicit attention to underlying mental models, there is a risk of false consensus, of new information emerging late in the process, or of certain perspectives not being taken seriously. This can undermine trust and support. Third, structural change can be delayed. Transitions require not only new solutions, but also new ways of seeing. Without that shift, systems continue to function largely as before.

It starts with a better diagnosis

We rarely ask ourselves what type of decision-making problem we are actually dealing with. Is decision-making truly too slow? Or do we sometimes make decisions too quickly, without considering enough perspectives? Are we missing crucial insights because we take a too narrow view? Or do we create a false sense of certainty by gathering ever more information without making clear choices?

Effective decision-making therefore starts with a precise diagnosis of the challenge. Without this clarity, we are likely to choose the wrong intervention.

The table below provides an overview of various decision-making challenges in relation to different mental models, the intended outcomes, and examples.

_{Table: Decision-Making Challenges}

Time for a different perspective, including our own

This also requires a shift from us as researchers and advisors. Many professionals – myself included – tend to focus on transmitting knowledge: presenting insights, sharing reports and providing more arguments, based on the belief that better information leads to better decisions. In practice, however, it works differently. Information alone rarely changes beliefs. The reality is that people ultimately convince themselves. This means influence does not start with transmitting, but with understanding. Not with providing information, but with building trust, and not with arguing, but with exploring what prevents someone from considering a different perspective.

The wrong question

This brings us back to the core. In many decision-making processes, we implicitly or explicitly ask: how do we get others on board? Or even: how do we convince them? But perhaps the problem does not lie with the other person, but with the question we ask. The question that truly matters is: what prevents someone from embracing a new mental model? As long as this question is not central, we will continue to focus on acceleration without removing the underlying barriers. And that means we may take decisions more quickly, but not necessarily better ones.

The invitation is therefore: in your next decision-making process, do not ask how to build support, but ask which mental models are still blocking the conversation – including your own. What are the underlying assumptions and expectations? Which beliefs and values are at play? Where are opportunities to connect? Where does friction arise? That is where better decision-making begins.