The EconomistPublished: January 16, 2012Winners and losersJan 16th 2012, 15:31 by The Economist onlineHow have the world's big economies fared since 2007?AS MANY rich economies face recession this year, it is interesting to compare how output per person has changed in the world's big economies since 2007, just before the financial crisis hit. According to the Economist Intelligence Units forecasts, people in Britain, America, France and Japan will be less well-off in 2012 than they were in 2007. In Britain, real GDP per person will drop by more than 5% compared with its pre-crisis level. Germany and the BRIC countries are doing better. Indias real output per person is forecast to be 34% higher this year than it was in 2007; the increase in China will be over 50%. Harvard Business School - Harvard UniversityPublished: December 1, 2011Executive Summary:Summing Up Readers of Jim Heskett's column this month offer guidelines for when to think fast and when to think slow, from author Daniel Kahneman'sbook, Thinking, Fast and Slow.About Faculty in this Article:James Heskett is a Baker Foundation Professor, Emeritus, at Harvard Business School.More Working Knowledge from James HeskettJames Heskett - FacultyResearch Summing UpSummarizing responses to questions about a topic as complex as thinking slow requires that one think slow. So I wrote this column, slept on it, rewrote it, and still have problems with it. But deadlines, as they so often do, help us avoid the "analysis paralysis" associated with the downside of thinking slow.So here is what my gut tells me about what you said this month: Thinking slow, as Daniel Kahneman calls it in his recent book by that name, is important under circumstances of high risk, uncertain outcomes, and a limited experience base with the challenge requiring a decision. Good leaders know when to think slow. All of us need mechanisms for helping us to know. Some elements of bureaucracy can be included among the devices. But, as Ganesh Ramakrishnan said, "... we probably (need) to enrich the vocabulary ... The word bureaucracy is associated with stagnation, rigidity, unthinking application of age-old rules ... (vs.) careful reflective thought on matters that need intelligent application of criteria."Just how to promote slow thinking where it is appropriate stimulated an interesting and stimulating debate. As Dave Schnedier put it, "I agree with Kahneman's diagnosis, but not his remedy... Whether the decision is to be made by an individual, a team, or 'the bureaucracy', I would say that all would be well served by the discipline ... imposed by adherence to a rational process... (which) requires the intellectual rigor that professional management can impose..." Sudheer Thaakur concurred: "... in a world that is more complex and uncertain and ambiguous we should be promoting slow and deliberative thinking. Till we do that we will not be able to fully utilize the opportunity offered by (the) structured nature of organization." Rebecca Mott said "let's not forget the plethora of research that shows teams consistently outperform individuals. It is the modifying effect of the team, which also slows down the decision-making process, that produces a better result."