Services

Thinking better, together!

Whether you're an individual, a team or an organisation, the way we think shapes the way we act. Through tailored formats and research-based methods, I support you in refining your thinking, strengthening your decisions and building clarity where it matters most.

Individual coaching: two clasped hands symbolising support and partnership.

Individuals

Clarity starts with you.

In one-to-one sessions we examine how you think, decide and reflect. Whether you are facing personal crossroads, professional uncertainty or simply want to sharpen your cognitive skills, this space helps you build clarity and confidence in your choices.

Together we surface cognitive patterns, challenge mental shortcuts and install practical tools for better thinking. The work is grounded in cognitive and behavioural psychology and it is always tailored to your goals.

Outcomes

  • Greater mental clarity and noticeably less decision fatigue

  • Reduced rumination and cognitive overload

  • Enhanced self-awareness and a more deliberate handling of personal thinking patterns

  • Improved decision quality through recognition of cognitive biases

  • Stronger confidence in one’s own judgement and ability to act

Formats

  • 60 or 90 minute sessions

  • 4 or 8 week programme

  • In person or virtual, with optional asynchronous check-ins

Typical focus areas

  • Making high-stakes or long-term decisions

  • Reflecting on internal conflicts or external pressures

  • Strengthening self-awareness and metacognition

  • Understanding personal bias and emotional influences

  • Learning to think more clearly under pressure

Topics covered

Decision-making frameworks, bias detection, metacognition, dual-process thinking, AI as a thinking partner

Scientific foundation

Research shows that targeted reflection and the training of metacognitive strategies significantly improve decision quality, reduce rumination, and strengthen confidence in one’s own judgement. Even brief bias-awareness interventions have been shown to produce measurable improvements in decision behaviour (Morewedge et al., 2015; Kakinohana & Pilati, 2023; Larrick & Feiler, 2015).

The aim is independence. You leave with tools, language and routines to think clearly and act with intent.

Start here
eam workshop: diverse hands stacked together in collaboration.

Teams

Better collaboration begins with better thinking.

In team settings, thinking doesn’t happen in isolation, it unfolds through communication, habits and shared assumptions. In tailored workshops or ongoing formats, I help teams reflect on how they think together, where cognitive biases creep in and how collective decisions can become more intentional and effective.

Whether you're navigating complex projects, internal conflicts or cultural change, my work focuses on building clarity, shared language and cognitive flexibility - together.

Outcomes

  • Significantly shorter decision cycles with higher overall quality

  • Fewer frictions and misunderstandings in meetings

  • Clearer responsibilities and stronger commitment across the team

  • Early detection of groupthink and hidden cognitive dynamics

  • Shared understanding of priorities and decision pathways

Formats

  • 2 or 4 hour workshop

  • 1 day intensive

  • 6 week sprint with guided practice

  • in person or virtual

Typical goals

  • Identifying blind spots in team communication and decision-making

  • Recognising and addressing group-based biases and thought patterns

  • Enhancing psychological safety and productive disagreement

  • Developing a shared framework for evaluating complex problems

  • Fostering critical thinking and reflective practices across the team

Topics covered

Critical thinking group decision-making, bias detection, argument quality, premortems, red teaming, AI in the loop

Scientific foundation

Research on team decision-making shows that structured reflection routines and clearly defined decision frameworks improve coordination, reduce rework, and lead to higher-quality outcomes. Studies further demonstrate that psychological safety and shared bias awareness significantly enhance communication quality and decision speed (Rutka et al., 2023; Jones & Roelofsma, 2000; Curșeu & Schruijer, 2012; Midtgård & Selart, 2025).

Workshops are always scientifically grounded, yet never abstract. Each format is practical, interactive, and tailored to your team’s specific dynamics and needs.

Schedule a team workshop
Organisational consulting: overhead view of a team meeting with laptops and notes.

Organisations

Strategic clarity through cognitive insight.

In complex systems, decision-making depends not only on data but on how people think. I help organisations in building the cognitive foundations for better choices, from leadership teams making high-stakes decisions to departments shaping communication, evaluation and strategy.

Together we design thinking environments that are bias-aware, built for clarity and structured for long-term success. We identify blind spots, sharpen evaluative processes and install decision frameworks aligned with your goals and values.

Outcomes

  • Consistent and resilient decisions across teams and hierarchical levels

  • Clear responsibilities, efficient implementation and reduced friction across decision processes

  • Reduction of bias and noise in critical decision processes

  • Transparent reasoning and increased traceability of strategic decisions

Formats

  • Executive workshops: half day or full day

  • Decision system audit: 2 to 4 weeks

  • Ongoing strategic advisory: monthly or quarterly

  • Leadership offsite facilitation

Possible work streams

  • Designing decision architectures that reduce bias and increase transparency

  • Building internal capacity for critical thinking and strategic reasoning

  • Supporting leadership teams in high-complexity, high-impact choices

  • Facilitating cross-departmental reflection and communication

  • Embedding reflective practices in change, innovation and strategy work

Topics covered

Choice architecture, risk and uncertainty, evidence appraisal, bias detection, AI literacy, AI governance

Scientific foundation

Empirical studies show that organisations with clearly defined decision processes and structured evaluation frameworks make faster, more consistent, and higher-quality decisions. Bias-sensitive decision architectures have been proven to reduce rework, increase strategic coherence, and strengthen trust within leadership teams (Dean & Sharfman, 1996; Milkman et al., 2009; Larrick & Feiler, 2015; Theodorakopoulos et al., 2025).

The collaboration is always tailored, whether as focused consulting, leadership workshops or ongoing strategic guidance.

Start an organisation audit
Keynote speaking: microphone on stage with blurred audience lights.

Keynotes

Inspiration meets insight.

When I speak, my aim is not to impress but to invite thinking. Each talk opens new perspectives on how we think, why we fall into mental traps and what it takes to make better decisions in a complex world.

Rooted in science and built for practice, my keynotes blend cognitive psychology, real stories and clear tools. They spark reflection, challenge assumptions and turn insight into action.

Outcomes

  • Heightened awareness of one’s own thinking processes and biases

  • New perspectives on leadership, communication and decision-making

  • Scientifically grounded aha moments with lasting impact

  • An impulse to consciously question and transform established thought patterns

  • A balance of inspiration and analytical depth

Formats

  • 20 - 30 minutes

  • 45 - 60 minutes plus Q&A

  • Fireside chat or interview format

  • In person or virtual

Signature talks

  • Why smart people make poor decisions and how to change that

  • Thinking under pressure: clarity in moments that matter

  • Bias, belief and behavior: navigating uncertainty with insight

  • How to think critically in an age of noise and misinformation

  • What cognitive science can teach us about leadership and self-awareness

Topics covered

Critical thinking, bias detection, decision-making frameworks, argument quality, AI as a working partner

Scientific foundation

Studies show that even brief, evidence-based trainings and interventions lead to significant improvements in judgement and decision-making processes. Formats that target bias recognition and metacognitive insight foster lasting changes in thinking and behaviour — particularly among professionals and leaders (Morewedge et al., 2015; Lilienfeld et al., 2009; Berthet, 2022; Midtgård & Selart, 2025).

Every keynote is tailored to the audience and context, whether it’s a leadership retreat, a conference or a company-wide event. The aim is always the same: to plant a seed for better thinking.

Enquire about a Keynote

  • Berthet, V. (2022). The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals’ Decision-Making: A Review of Four Occupational Areas. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 802439. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.802439

    Curşeu, P. L., & Schruijer, S. G. L. (2012). Decision Styles and Rationality: An Analysis of the Predictive Validity of the General Decision-Making Style Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(6), 1053–1062. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164412448066

    Dean, J. W., & Scharfman, M. P. (1996). Does Decision Process Matter? A Study of Strategic Decision-Making Effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 368–396.

    Jones, P. E., & Roelofsma, P. H. M. P. (2000). The potential for social contextual and group biases in team decision-making: Biases, conditions and psychological mechanisms. Ergonomics, 43(8), 1129–1152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130050084914

    Kakinohana, R. K., & Pilati, R. (2023). Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: Examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 36(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z

    Larrick, R. P., & Feiler, D. C. (2015). Expertise in Decision Making. In G. Keren & G. Wu (Hrsg.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (1. Aufl., S. 696–721). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118468333.ch24

    Lilienfeld, S. O., Ammirati, R., & Landfield, K. (2009). Giving Debiasing Away: Can Psychological Research on Correcting Cognitive Errors Promote Human Welfare? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(4), 390–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01144.x

    Midtgård, K., & Selart, M. (2025). Cognitive Biases in Strategic Decision-Making. Administrative Sciences, 15(6), 227. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15060227

    Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). How Can Decision Making Be Improved? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(4), 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01142.x

    Morewedge, C. K., Yoon, H., Scopelliti, I., Symborski, C. W., Korris, J. H., & Kassam, K. S. (2015). Debiasing Decisions: Improved Decision Making With a Single Training Intervention. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215600886

    Theodorakopoulos, L., Theodoropoulou, A., & Halkiopoulos, C. (2025). Cognitive Bias Mitigation in Executive Decision-Making: A Data-Driven Approach Integrating Big Data Analytics, AI, and Explainable Systems. Electronics, 14(19), 3930. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics14193930