Less Is More, More or Less

The idea that too many options can lead to anxiety is not new. In fact, it can be traced back to ancient philosophy, although it was more recently explored in Barry Schwartz’s The Paradox of Choice—a book I haven’t read because there are just too many books to read.

Schwartz argues, I’m told, that the abundance of choice in modern society has become a source of distress rather than some kind of liberation. When faced with too many options—whether it’s choosing a career path, someone to marry, or a Netflix show to watch—we often end up paralyzed by fear. We procrastinate on decisions to avoid making the wrong choice, and even after we finally do decide, we’re haunted by the thought that maybe one of the other options would have turned out better.

Some of the most successful companies in the world have recognized an opportunity in this choice “paralysis” and have made a conscious effort to limit their offerings. For example, In-N-Out Burger has a stubbornly minimal menu that hasn’t changed since the 1950s. Or consider Steve Jobs’ Apple: When he returned to the company in 1997, one of his first moves was to slash their product line by two-thirds. Both companies understand something crucial: Sometimes the kindest thing you can do for your customers is not to ask them too many questions.

When to stop looking

Suppose you’re looking for a movie to watch on an airplane, and your list of options consists of a hundred films. The video player application is rather clumsy. You see the movie titles one by one, in random order, with no way of knowing what the next one will be, and after seeing an option, you have to decide on the spot to either watch the movie all the way till the end or move on forever. If you reach the hundredth title and haven’t picked one yet, you have to watch the leftover option. How do you make sure not to miss out on the best movie?

Replace a few words in the same question, and the answer may have an even bigger impact on your life: How many people should you interview before hiring a candidate for a job? How many people should you date before finding someone to marry? These questions have a long and rich history in mathematics literature, where they are known as “the secretary problem,” one of the many “optimal stopping” problems.

So as not to bore the reader with the details (and they are easy to look up anyway), it’s quite obvious that flipping through all the movies and watching the very last one is not the best course of action. The optimal solution is to reject the first 37 percent of the titles without thinking, and then pick the next movie that’s better than all the ones you’ve seen on the list. This will provide a large enough sample to know what’s out there, without having to waste time looking through all the options. It’s math’s way of saying that good decisions don’t always require hard work.

If it’s good enough for you

Mindlessly choosing any option is not as bad as it sounds. Dan Gilbert, a Harvard psychologist who has spent decades studying happiness and decision-making, investigated how our minds simulate future scenarios as well as why people are so consistently bad at predicting what will make them happy. In his book Stumbling on Happiness, he writes, “Our desire to control is so powerful, and the feeling of being in control so rewarding, that people often act as though they can control the uncontrollable.”

Coined by the scholar Herbert A. Simon, the term “satisficing” captures some of these same insights. Satisficing refers to the practice of choosing the first option that meets our basic needs, rather than obsessing over finding the perfect solution. While the pursuit of the best might seem tempting, it often leads to anxiety and regret. And so, in many situations, selecting a decent option and swiftly moving on is not merely sufficient, but it is the best overall solution when considering the total cost of the decision, echoing the argument that accepting “good enough” can lead to greater happiness.

To once again quote from the book I haven’t read: Barry Schwartz, the social psychologist referenced in this article’s intro, notes in The Paradox of Choice: “Become a satisficer: Appreciating and embracing ‘good enough’ will simplify decision making and increase satisfaction.”

The price of changing your mind

Adaptability is particularly important in the fast-paced world of startups, where the concept of “failing fast” has become a mantra for innovation. Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are encouraged to test their ideas quickly, learn from their failures, and pivot as needed, as opposed to pushing through flawed concepts out of pride or fear. This iterative approach cultivates a culture where experimentation is valued over perfection. The possibility of failure is seen as a stepping stone rather than a setback—a kind of decision-making we can apply in many situations at home.

Decision-Making Essential Reads

How Choices Shape Identity, Behavior, and the Brain

How High Performers Overcome Decision Fatigue

The cruel irony of making decisions: Often the real cost isn’t in making the wrong choice, but in our stubborn refusal to correct it. We’ve all sat through terrible movies until the bitter end or remained in dubious careers for far too long, only because we’ve already invested so much time preparing for it.

This phenomenon, known as the “sunk cost fallacy,” can trap us in a cycle of poor choices, one in which we cling to decisions that no longer serve us. The fear of admitting a mistake and the instinct to justify past investments may prevent us from seeking better alternatives. Acknowledging that it’s OK to pivot—whether that means stopping the movie halfway or shifting career paths entirely—liberates us from regret and opens up opportunities for more fulfilling experiences.