How thinking about cognitive biases will influence my final syllabus

As we go along in building our course syllabus, we integrate more and more content to it, considering different aspects of our course through different lenses. Last week we studied cognitive biases. Learning management is slightly based on theory, and mostly based on putting personal experiences, cases, examples and group discussions together to anchor this theory into practice. This let learners explore, as much as possible, nuances regarding the topics discussed. Also, it lets them discover their own inner strengths, weaknesses and capabilities in day-to-day management situations. In that perspective, main biases that will appear throughout learning management will probably be availability heuristic bias, confirmation bias, salience bias and pro-innovation bias (namely for change management). There are many examples in literature that highlight, directly or indirectly, manifestation of these biases in organizations. After last week session, I plan to add throughout my course concrete examples of situations where these biases were present in decision making. To push learners to see how System 1 (ref. Daniel Kahneman, Thinking Fast and Slow) can get in easily and feed these biases, using cases will be relevant. For example, to illustrate availability heuristic, I could use the example of a conflict on the clinical teaching unit where limited information is available at first, but that guides learners towards a particular decision that may seem obvious or towards a frequent situation (this is particularly true in cultural management). In a next step, I could present additional information showing the complexity of the situation, that was at first looking like an usual conflict on the clinical teaching unit, but that in fact leads to another decision or situation. With this exercise in mind, I would hope to engage their System 2 to be activated more frequently, remembering that simple management situations, at first sight, may be more complex when analyzed in depth with the activation of System 2. Moreover, for the whole course, I could remind them to stay systematic and use the frameworks I gave them to evaluate the situations in which they are in. I don't want my learners to disengage their System 1, of course, but I just want them to be aware of these biases and stay systematic in their analysis, even in ''usual looking'' situations, to at least minimize biases.