Hungry Judges, the Fly in the Urinal, and Choice Architecture

Applying Nobel-Winning Behavioural Economics Ideas to Intelligent Enterprise Engineering

Enterprise engineering is entering a profound phase of reinvention. With the advent of intelligent tools and increased compute, software engineering will dramatically change, leading to the rewriting of many legacy applications using a fundamentally new approach. As we embrace this change, I offer perspectives on how a subset of Nobel Prize-winning concepts from behavioural economics can guide the creation of intelligent, large-scale enterprise products across industries. This article aims to introduce the basic concepts and ideas, with implementation details to be covered in a subsequent article.

3 Theories

1) Urinal Fly theory

In the 1990s, Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport faced an unusual challenge: how to keep their men’s restroom floors clean. The ingenious solution was a simple etching of a fly near the center of each urinal. Men instinctively aimed at the fly, reducing spillage by an astonishing 80%. A small design change has influenced the behaviour without restricting freedom. ‘A fly may have unsanitary connotations, but that is exactly why nobody feels guilty aiming at it!’ Mentioned, a manager at the airport.

Urinal fly

Richard Thaler won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017 for his contributions to behavioral economics. His original research was around how do human traits govern individual economic decisions and what effect do they have on markets as a whole? He wrote that "It seems that men usually do not pay much attention to where they aim, which can create a bit of a mess, but if they see a target, attention and therefore accuracy are much increased".

2) Hungry Judges Theory

Hungry Judges Theory refers to a phenomenon observed in a 2011 study that suggests judges are more likely to make favourable rulings after taking a meal break and less likely as time passes between meals. The study, titled “Extraneous factors in judicial decisions” and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), analysed over 1,000 parole decisions made by eight Israeli judges over a 10-month period.

Couple of Key Findings are:

• Decision Patterns: The likelihood of a judge granting parole started high in the morning (around 65%) and decreased to nearly zero before the first meal break. After eating, the approval rate spiked back up and then declined again until the next break.

• Decision Fatigue: The researchers attributed this pattern to mental fatigue. As judges make more decisions, they may experience decision fatigue, leading them to opt for the easier default choice, which is often to deny parole.

3) System 1 and System 2

System 1 and System 2, concepts introduced by Award winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman in Thinking, Fast and Slow, gives better explanation to the above situation. When linked to evolution, they offer fascinating insights into how these systems developed to help humans survive and adapt.

System 1: The Fast, Intuitive System 1 evolved as a survival mechanism. Early humans faced immediate threats like predators or environmental dangers. Quick, intuitive decisions often meant the difference between life and death. So quickly recognizing patterns (e.g., movement in grass signaling a predator) helped humans react swiftly to avoid danger.

System 2: The Slow, Analytical System 2 evolved to handle complex, non-urgent problems, like crafting tools, planning migrations, or solving social conflicts. As human brains developed, the ability to think abstractly and plan became essential for thriving in unpredictable environments. Both systems work together to optimize survival: System 1 handles routine and immediate threats, conserving energy for the brain. System 2 steps in when problems require deeper analysis or innovation. While System 1 is fast, it’s prone to errors (e.g., mistaking a stick for a snake). System 2 is more accurate but slower and energy intensive, so it’s activated only when necessary. When situations are overly complex or overwhelming for an individual's cognitive capacity, or when an individual is faced with time constraints, tired or other pressures, System 1 processing takes over decision making which could be sub optimal in many situations. It’s the same reason that when you learn to drive a car, you need lot of attention (System 2) where as you don’t pay same attention if you are an experienced driver (System 1).

Overall - These theories, inspired by the Nobel-winning ideas of Richard Thaler and Daniel Kahneman, highlight two powerful observations:

1. Small design changes can significantly influence behaviour without restricting freedom. In other words, subtle tweaks in environment or presentation can nudge people toward different actions while still leaving them choice.

2. Human beings are not always rational, especially when overwhelmed by complexity or fatigue. In high-complexity or high pressure situations, our rational System 2 may cede control to the instinctive System 1. When that happens, decisions can be suboptimal or biased because we rely on mental shortcuts and default responses.

These insights have profound implications for large enterprises grappling with complex projects and decision-heavy environments. They suggest that by changing how choices are presented (observation 1), we can guide behaviour for better outcomes. At the same time, in complex scenarios, people’s decision-making will degrade under cognitive load (observation 2) unless we consciously design systems to support them. In other words, even smart, well-intentioned teams can fall prey to decision fatigue, information overload, and groupthink if the context for decisions is poorly designed. However, if we thoughtfully structure the context in which decisions are made, we can mitigate those human limitations - essentially providing a better decision making framework that helps avoid bad heuristics and encourages better ones.

Design and Engineering a system for a complex functioning domain (For ex: Replacing a complex enterprise system with a modern intelligent system) is akin to performing surgery on a living organism without anesthesia; intricate, sensitive, and fraught with potential complications. According to studies highlighted in Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner’s book, How Big Things Get Done, a significant percentage (Above 90%) of large-scale projects fail to meet their objectives and one of the main reason is due to organizational complexity and human dynamics. As many organizations begin engineering intelligent products, how can we navigate these challenges and achieve complex objectives?

What is Choice Architecture

Choice architecture is the deliberate structuring or organization of the context in which people make decisions. It’s about designing the environment in which decisions are made with the aim of influencing the choices people make without restricting their freedom. In simpler terms, it focuses on how options are presented rather than what the options are. Every interface, process, or scenario that requires a decision has a “choice architecture” - whether intentional or not. In fact, there is no such thing as a neutral design; seemingly trivial details in how choices are arranged can have major effects on what people choose . A choice architect is anyone who designs those details, whether it’s a UI/UX designer laying out a dialog box or a manager setting up an approval process. The best engineering companies architect choices to make the complexity manageable. Companies that consistently deliver complex projects have strong invisible architectures, while others either have bad or unintentional architectures.

The Basic Idea: Everyday Nudges

To grasp choice architecture, it helps to recognize the nudges all around us in daily life. Consider a few scenarios:

• Supermarket Layout: Ever wonder why supermarkets place essentials like bread, milk, or eggs at the back of the store? They want you to walk past a gauntlet of impulse buys – the colorful snacks, sodas, and goodies you didn’t plan to get – so you’ll grab a few extra items on your “quick trip” for milk. The store isn’t forcing you to buy chips and candy, but the layout nudges you toward it by increasing exposure. Your shopping trip is subtly guided for maximum spending.

• Streaming Autoplay: Why do Netflix and other streaming services autoplay the next episode by default? This design is nudged for maximum viewing – it capitalizes on our tendency to continue what we’re already doing. By automatically starting the next show unless you actively stop it, the platform structures your choice (continue watching vs. stop) in a way that the easier path is to just keep watching. Again, you’re free to stop anytime, but the choice architecture gently pushes you to binge.

• “Ballot Bin” for Litter: Not all nudges are commercial; some solve social or environmental problems. A creative example is the Ballot Bin, a bright yellow public ashtray designed by the charity Hubbub (with Common Works design studio) to reduce cigarette butt litter. The bin poses a playful question – for instance, “Who’s the greatest footballer: Messi or Ronaldo?” – with two transparent compartments labeled with the two answers. Smokers “vote” by choosing a compartment to stub out their cigarette. The design turns throwing away trash into a game. Smokers are nudged to use the bin because it’s fun and engaging, not because they were ordered to. This choice architecture dramatically increased proper disposal of cigarette butts by tapping into a bit of competitive spirit.

Ballot Bin

In all these cases, our decisions are influenced by how the choices are presented. The supermarket isn’t adding new choices; it’s rearranging them. Netflix isn’t forcing us to watch; it’s just removing a moment of friction where we might have stopped. The Ballot Bin doesn’t mandate behaviour; it makes the preferred behaviour more attractive. A pre-checked box doesn’t eliminate an option; it just makes one option (the one beneficial to the company or user) the path of least resistance. This is the essence of choice architecture: by shaping the context in which people decide, we nudge behaviour while preserving freedom. Positive reinforcement, clever defaults, and implicit suggestions can all influence behaviour in powerful ways.

Now, the question is: How can we leverage these principles in the context of enterprise engineering? The stakes in enterprises are very high – projects are complex, teams are large, and the cost of bad decisions or poor adoption can be enormous. Let’s explore how choice architecture can be applied to organizational design, engineering , and product design to improve outcomes.

Leveraging Choice Architecture for Large Scale Engineering Projects:

Product/Engineering Org:

One of the most underrated yet critical aspects in large, complex projects is designing your org structure to accomplish them. In enterprises, complexity isn’t just technical; it’s structural. Projects often span multiple teams (yes, agents too), departments, geographies, and reporting layers. Hierarchies, siloed functions, misaligned incentives, and bureaucratic sludge don’t just slow things down; they bleed cognitive bandwidth.

Working in large enterprise companies often feels like 95% of your energy is consumed by battling organizational complexity, legacy systems, and alignment issues. This leaves only a fraction of your energy for build and Innovation. This isn’t an exaggeration; it’s a systemic reality. When engineers spend most of their energy navigating structure instead of shaping systems, it’s a failure of Choice Architecture.

We’ve seen lean teams build reusable rockets, implant brain chips, and reimagine entire industries; while some enterprises struggle for a decade to replace a basic mainframe system. The common thread? Teams that win design the structure in which decisions are made. They don’t fight the system; they build one that flows.

(Have you ever looked at the org chart of a top racing teams? Their split-second decision-making in the pit and continual innovation on the car don’t happen by accident ; their organizational choice architecture is finely tuned to enable those outcomes)

As leaders, we underestimate how much bureaucratic noise and alignment theater can drain high-agency talent. Choice Architecture is your silent operating system. It determines whether your team builds or burns out. Some of the best-run governments and elite companies don’t just have smart people; they have seasoned choice architects who design frictionless systems where great decisions emerge naturally.

As someone wisely said, culture is something that employees discover while working. Your choice architecture significantly influences your culture. A quick check is your new employee onboarding process or your internal approval workflows. Imagine a rock star engineer joining your engineering team, only to spend two weeks just getting access to necessary tools and systems etc or requires approval for every act. You don't explicitly teach them your culture; they experience it firsthand. These seemingly small environmental factors send a strong message about “how things are done here.”

Engineering:

Establish Clear Engineering Vision and Goals: Articulate a compelling vision that aligns with organizational values. When engineers understand the big picture, they’re nudged to make decisions that support overarching objectives.

The legendry examples are what Amazon or Apple have done during the initial stages of product development; Amazon’s clarity on building APIs or Apple’s decision on focusing on building fewer but incredible products following Zen philosophies enabled their teams nudging for making better decisions.

They simply enable their Orgs to make fewer decisions but incredibly sounds decisions. It doesn’t mean creating 100’s of checklist which is a Big NO for Designers and engineers. Design and Engineering should be approached with the creativity, intuition and characteristic of Art. This notes the significance of Choice Architecture vs setting up a checklist or micro managing your teams.

("Remember Bezos API Mandate (2002) email ? As an engineering leader, what would be the modern equivalent of that message? Consider how AI can enable the integration of self-healing and anti-fragility into systems.")

Product Design and Experiences for Users:

The most basic function of a phone is to make and receive calls. Yet, if you’ve ever gotten a second call while you were already on one, you’ve probably felt a moment of total confusion and frustration trying to decide what to tap - “Do I put the first call on hold? Do I merge them? Did I just hang up on someone?” That panic UI is a result of poor choice architecture. The user is confronted with too many unclear options in a high-stress moment, creating cognitive overload. It’s unfortunate that many companies treat design as an afterthought or a luxury. In reality, bad design is extremely costly; it frustrates users, reduces productivity, drives customers away, and can even “kill” your product over time as people find alternatives. Especially in enterprise IT, a confusing interface can lead to errors, training overhead, and low adoption of a system that cost millions to build. Simplifying and guiding user choices isn’t just nice to have; it can make or break the solution.

Key principles of choice architecture in design include:

Designing Product Experiences and User Journeys: In design, choice architecture is used to guide users through a specific journey or process by presenting options in a deliberate order or structure. This is your significant opportunity build product experiences. Legendry companies stand for something and they have strong opinions. This is your biggest opportunity for coding your company philosophies into the products.

Simplifying Complexity: Designers use choice architecture to reduce cognitive overload by limiting or organizing choices. Remember System 1 and System 2 theory and help users take best decisions.

Influencing Behavior: Designers embed nudges; Subtle cues or features that encourage certain behaviors into choice architecture. Examples include setting default options (e.g., auto enrollment in subscriptions) or emphasizing eco-friendly products with visual cues.

Ethical Considerations: Choice architecture also intersects with ethical design. Designers have the power to influence decisions, so they must balance usability with responsibility, ensuring they aren’t manipulating users unfairly (e.g., through dark patterns). Ensure your nudges benefit users rather than exploiting them. Bad design is far more expensive in the long run, damaging both products and trust. Also, think about transparency incase if you are designing an autonomous Choice Architect using AI!

Another example is your term insurance renewal. Last year, your subscription included your parents' insurance, but when the insurance company sent reminders and you forgot to confirm it, they removed your parents and only deducted for you and your spouse. One reason they might do this is to avoid the risk associated with your parents' higher chances of falling sick. This is an example of a dark pattern. Now the question is, should you partner with companies whose choice architects decide to follow such dark patterns?

In my opinion, building and operating cities, schools, healthcare, and food services require the highest levels of integrity. While you won't find a company that doesn't list "integrity" among its core values, you can gauge their level of commitment by carefully observing their choice architecture.

In summary, Choice Architecture is not just a concept; it is a transformative force in building products and experiences, designing organizations, and engineering for value. When shaping an organization or crafting products and experiences, consider how choice architecture can guide decisions, streamline user interactions, and subtly influence outcomes for the better. In the realm of AI-driven workflows, being mindful of the choice architecture presented in products is essential.

You have the power to create a lasting legacy by researching and applying Choice Architecture. Embrace this responsibility and leverage Choice Architecture to create products that are not only intelligent but also impactful.

(Inspired by the works of legends in behavioural economics, design, and systems thinking; As mentioned earlier, this article aims to introduce several key concepts but Frameworks, tools, and implementation details will be covered in a subsequent article.)