Abstract Decision-making is one of the most important activities that all human beings engage in. Good decisions are critical for organizational growth and productivity. This paper discusses the common psychological traps in decision-making. They include the anchoring trap, the status-quo trap, the sunk cost trap, the confirming evidence trap, the framing trap, the overconfidence trap, the prudence trap, and the recall-ability trap. The paper gives examples of each trap and offers solutions to avoid these traps. By recognizing and subsequently avoiding these mental flaws, the decision maker will be in a position to make the best decision. Introduction Decision-making is an integral part of human life. People have to constantly make decisions in their personal and professional lives. Business decisions often have significant implications on the performance of the business. A poor decision could reduce the productivity of the organization or even cause its failure. This begs the question what causes individuals to make poor decisions. The decision making process is hampered by some obstacles that prevent individuals from making sound decisions. Hammond, Keeney and Raiffa reveal that a person is more likely to fall into the hidden traps if there are high stakes in the decisions being made (1). In order to prevent these obstacles from affecting the decision-making process, it is important to be aware of the obstacles. This paper will discuss the common psychological traps in decision-making and offer suggestions on how decision makers can avoid these traps and therefore make the best decisions in any given circumstance. The Traps in Decision-making The Anchoring Trap The first trap is the anchoring trap, which is characterized by an over-emphasis on the initial thoughts. In this case, the decision maker places too much weight on the initial ideas, estimates, impressions, or data being used to help in the decision making process. Wang reveals that the human brain is predisposed to give disproportionate weight to the first information received and this information is used to make subsequent decisions (10). For example, a company executive might ask the manager to come up with a propose estimate for a new company office. The executive might then suggest that estimate is likely to be $200,000. When making the budget, the manager’s thinking will be restricted to the estimate offered by the executive. He will therefore likely come up with a figure that is close to the $200,000. To avoid this trap, the decision maker must consider other options in addition to the first thought. In addition to this, information should be sought from a variety of sources to ensure that the person does not restrict himself due to the psychological trap. The Status-Quo Trap The Status quo trap is characterized by a high preference to alternatives that maintain the existing situation. Even when presented with better alternatives, the decision maker is likely to show strong prejudice against the alternatives if they are going to offset the status quo. Hammond et al. suggest that people tend to favor the status-quo since breaking from it means that we have to take responsibility for what might go wrong (4). An example of a status quo is a company that keeps on advertising in the print press even after it is clear that there would be more efficient ways to reach the customers. The managers might decide to maintain their usual print-advertisement since the company has a his