Man walks into a bar. There are thirty different draught beers. He knows some of them and loves to drink them. He's heard of others and has always wanted to try them. A few are new to him and look appealing.

After five minutes he leaves the bar without buying a beer, frustrated by his inability to choose. He goes next door to a pub.

The pub sells two draught beers; one he loves, one he'd love to try. Buy he's still thinking about the range of beers in the bar. He's regretting not choosing one. He still doesn't know which one he'd choose. All he knows is that he now doesn't want either of the two beers on offer in this pub. He leaves, disappointed. But not sure why he feels that way.

He seeks solace in a tied pub owned by one of his favourite brewers. They only serve one beer. He orders a pint and retreats to a quiet corner. As the glass reaches his lips, he thinks of the beers on offer in the other pub. He regrets not having a choice of beer here.

He feels bitter. Even though he hasn't even drank a beer.

In 'The Tyranny Of Choice', psychologist Barry Schwartz suggests that even though choice is "unambiguously a good thing" and that some choice is good it doesn't mean that more choice is better.

When does the thrill of seemingly-endless tap handles turn to apprehension? When does anticipation turn to doubt? When does an eventual choice at the bar run the risk of turning later to remorse? Or guilt?

What is the sweet-spot number of options? When is 'good enough' actually good enough?



If you're interested in learning more about Schwartz and the tyranny / paradox of choice, try these; featured on BBC Business Daily, his TED talk from 2005 and his Google TechTalk from 2006 >