Sufficiency vs Maximization

· 2 min · Quick read · Joost van der Laan

Sufficiency versus maximization contrasts two decision-making styles: “satisficing,” stopping once an option meets your criteria, against “maximizing,” continuing to search for the objectively best possible option.

The idea

Economist and Nobel laureate Herbert Simon coined “satisficing” to describe how people actually make most decisions: given limited time and information, they pick the first option that clears a “good enough” bar rather than exhaustively comparing every alternative. A maximizer, by contrast, keeps searching for the single best option. Psychologist Barry Schwartz later studied maximizing as a personality tendency and linked it to lower satisfaction and more regret, since maximizers pay a real cost in time and second-guessing for often-marginal gains in quality.

When to use it

How to apply it

  1. Before searching, define what “good enough” looks like — the concrete criteria an acceptable option must meet.
  2. Search until an option meets those criteria, then stop.
  3. Reserve maximizing effort for the rare decisions where the stakes genuinely justify the extra search cost.

Watch out for

Sources

Herbert A. Simon’s work on bounded rationality and “satisficing” (1950s-70s); Barry Schwartz, The Paradox of Choice (2004).