The CEO of HealthyPet Inc. had recently noticed that they were not getting as much profits as before. She concluded that the main problem was the materials used in their pet foods, which was not certified with a "locally-grown" label. She called together her board of directors and told them that they needed to figure out a way to make their food more sustainable, otherwise they would be soon out of business... The VP of Operations commented that HealthyPet Inc. was doing exactly the same thing as 70% of other companies in the same industry, and he was unconvinced that the label might be the problem. At that point, the CEO reminded everyone about a recent qualitative market study that had been conducted with passionate pet owners. She said that although she did not have in mind the exact results of the study, she remembered one vocal person who could not stop talking about how food that was not "locally-grown" should not be fed to dogs and cats because this food has a very high carbon footprint. The VP of Business Development then suggested they should better switch to "gluten-free" label to make their products more sustainable. He argued that even though "gluten-free" label would not ensure low carbon footprint, it was significantly cheaper than "locally-grown" one, and that it would be enough to catch up on missed profits. Other members of the board of directors were quiet and no one contradicted him. The VP of Operations was about to say that he considered it necessary to renew their products completely, including such aspects as their transportation and packaging, but he looked around and no one else seemed to be in the mood to consider other suggestions. So, he decided to not say anything. "Well, great! We are all on the same page. We will get the "gluten-free" label, and it will be good enough to recover our losses from previous months. I believe in our team, and I know that you have all the necessary tools to get the label and get back to previous levels of sales!"

QUESTION:

Using your knowledge of decision biases and disadvantages of group decision-making, identify two of these elements (NOT two per type, but two in total - for example, one decision bias and one disadvantage of group decision-making; or two decision biases; or two disadvantages of group decision-making) that seemed to have affected the decision-making process described in the situation above. Provide a rationale for your answer and use information from the situation to support your answer. You will NOT get additional points for identifying more than two elements. If you can identify more than two, pick the ones that you will be able to explain in the most clear manner.