Noise: The Silent Disruptor of Boardroom Decisions
In boardrooms and leadership teams, we often talk about bias. We recognize overconfidence, loss aversion, anchoring, and all the familiar cognitive distortions that push decisions consistently in the wrong direction. Bias is dangerous, but at least it is predictable. Once you spot its pattern, you can correct for it.
Noise is different.
Noise is the unpredictable variability in human judgement. It is the hidden, random drift that causes capable leaders to reach different conclusions even when faced with the same facts, the same objectives, and the same strategic context. It does not announce itself. It doesn’t appear in dashboards or risk matrices. Yet it silently erodes decision quality every single day.
At its core, noise is the variability in evaluations and predictions—hiring decisions, investment cases, risk assessments, pricing reviews, project prioritization, crisis responses—where judgement should be consistent but rarely is.
Research shows that most organisations dramatically underestimate the level of noise present in their critical decisions. And because noise is invisible, it is almost never addressed.
The Three Drivers of Noise
Daniel Kahneman and his colleagues describe three forms of noise that affect organisations:
1. Level Noise
This is the systematic difference in “baseline judgement” between people. Two board members can look at the same investment case and arrive at fundamentally different conclusions because one is naturally more risk-averse while another consistently sees opportunity. Change who is in the room—or their level of energy, engagement, or stress—and you change the outcome.
2. Stable Pattern Noise
These are personal judgement fingerprints that appear across situations. A director may be optimistic about growth cases but consistently sceptical about technology investments because of past scars. These patterns are predictable, but rarely recognised.
3. Occasion Noise
This is the most human—and most dangerous—form. It reflects the fact that we are not the same person on Monday morning as we are on Friday evening. Fatigue, mood, cognitive load, external pressure and emotional context all influence judgement. The same leader may approve a proposal in one moment and reject it in another, not because the facts changed, but because they did.
When Groups Amplify Noise
Leaders often rely on group deliberation to create better decisions. Yet groups frequently magnify noise rather than reduce it. Early comments anchor others. Subtle social influence steers the room toward premature alignment. Discussion tends to polarise views rather than average them out. A single comment—positive or negative—can set a trajectory that others unconsciously follow.
The result: decisions appear collective but are, in reality, shaped by hidden variability and unexamined influence.
Reducing Noise: A Practical Boardroom Playbook
While noise cannot be eliminated, disciplined processes can drastically reduce its impact:
Collect independent assessments first. No discussion, no signalling, no early anchoring.
Use structured, well-defined rating scales. Ambiguity invites variability.
Ensure every judgement is fact-based and documented. Fuzzy data creates fuzzy decisions.
Vote silently and anonymously before any dialogue. Protect independence.
Interrogate outliers. Explore why assessments diverge, then re-vote.
Noise is not a behavioural flaw—it is a structural risk. Organisations that treat it as such gain a decisive strategic advantage: more consistent decisions, clearer governance, and a sharper lens on what truly drives performance.
At WideLens, we see noise as one of the most underestimated threats to boardroom effectiveness—and a powerful lever leaders can control when they know where to look.
