Identity Model of Decision Making

The Identity Model of Decision Making explains choices as answers to three implicit questions: Who am I? What kind of situation is this? What would a person like me do here? This lens complements, rather than replaces, analysis of costs and consequences.

When to use it

• Diagnose a change that conflicts with professional, group or personal identity.
• Understand why stronger incentives have not changed behaviour.
• Connect a new practice honestly with a valued self-concept.
• Surface identity tensions before they harden into resistance.

Origins

Political scientist James G. March and collaborators contrasted a “logic of appropriateness” with a “logic of consequences” in research on organisations and institutions. Under the former, people interpret a situation, recognise an identity or role and follow the behaviour they consider appropriate to it. Later change frameworks translated that idea into a practical identity model of decision making.

What it is

Consequence-based choice asks which option produces the preferred result. Identity-based choice asks which action fits the decision maker’s role, group membership and understanding of the situation. Both logics can operate together.

A behaviour that appears economically irrational may protect professional standards, belonging, dignity or continuity. Conversely, change becomes easier when the critical action expresses an identity people already respect. Identity is plural and contextual: the same person may be a manager, craft professional, parent, citizen and team member, with tensions among those roles.