When advisors should take the lead in decision making

New University of Florida research shows that when clients believe their advisor has much more expertise than they do, they often prefer direct guidance instead of collaboration.

You’re sitting in your doctor’s office, discussing treatment options for a health issue. Your doctor explains two possible paths, both filled with unfamiliar medical terms. You hesitate, unsure which option to choose, while your doctor waits for your answer. Should you really be the one making this decision? 

According to new University of Florida research, your answer may depend on how much expertise you believe you have compared to your doctor. Across professions, from healthcare to law to finance, experts are often taught that shared decision-making is always best. But UF researchers found that when people see their advisor as more knowledgeable, they prefer clear, directive advice over collaboration. 

Specifically, the researchers looked across three studies involving doctor-patient consultations, hairdresser-client interactions and legal advice scenarios. When people felt that they had comparable expertise to their advisor, they preferred a participative approach, where experts ask clients for input and make decisions together. However, when they perceived their advisor as having more expertise, they found a directive style, where experts tell clients what to do, as effective. 

“When someone recognizes they know very little about a topic, like a medical treatment, financial planning or legal strategy, they often don’t want the burden of joint decision-making,” explained Mo Wang, Distinguished Professor and Lanzillotti-McKethan Eminent Scholar Chair. “A directive approach that provides clear guidance actually validates their expectation that the expert should lead.”

For professionals across services where clients solicit advice, the researchers note the critical importance of these findings as advisors select the best way to work with their clients. While collaborative approaches remain the safest default in most situations, directive advice can be appropriate when expertise gaps are large and when efficiency matters, like time-sensitive decisions or when serving clients with limited knowledge on the topic.

“Our research challenges professionals to think more carefully about matching their advice style to their clients’ actual preferences, rather than assuming one works for everyone,” Wang said. “Genuine autonomy may include the choice to defer to expert judgement when individuals recognize they lack the expertise to meaningfully contribute to the decision.”

The complete research, “When Do People Prefer to Be Asked or Told? The Interplay between Participative/Directive Advising Style and Expertise Superiority in Recommendation Acceptance,” is forthcoming in the Journal of Applied Psychology.