Regret Cases

Regret Cases are situations in which a projection is materially deficient and the probability of the projected state of affairs is materially lower than we had thought. Regret Cases as we define them cannot be excused by pointing to factors beyond one’s control. Different action would have been taken had the firm known better and – in retrospect – there is an acute sense that it should have known better. 

It is in this respect, however, that Regret Cases are vexing. For, although the organization in some way erred, this is not to say the outcome resulted from foolish mistakes that easily could have been forefended if the firm had merely been more careful. Indeed, in most Regret Cases, firms view themselves as having followed standard procedures of decision-making.

Regret Cases occur with the frequency they do because the lapses that cause them typically are not obvious. (If they were, there would be fewer Regret Cases.) Unlike other cases that can be attributed to a kind of folly, Regret Cases cannot be explained in that fashion. They thus pose a special cognitive challenge.

Like many activities of day-to-day life that are largely second-nature, projecting occurs without our understanding (or even thinking it necessary to understand) the logic of its efficacy. But because this logic has not previously been made explicit, firms are not sensitive to important particularities that depart from standard notions of classical logic – for instance, with respect to rules of inference. For a variety of reasons, conditions in complex environments magnify the likelihood of these errors. Our Pragmatics methodology offers the Projective Logic that helps firms avoid Regret Cases.