Interview with Antoine Ferrère
- Merle van den Akker
- 2 hours ago
- 8 min read
Behavioural Science is a rapidly expanding field and everyday new research is being developed in academia, tested and implemented by practitioners in financial organisations, development agencies, government ‘nudge’ units and more. This interview is part of a series interviewing prominent people in the field. And in today's interview the answers are provided by Antoine Ferrère.
Antoine brings a unique blend of expertise in behavioral science, data science, and AI. With experience leading teams at Novartis as Global Head of Behavioral & Data Science, he has pioneered the integration of AI with behavioral insights to drive ethical decision-making and organizational transformation. His work has been published in MIT Sloan Management Review and Harvard Business Review, focusing on psychological safety, ethical conduct, and building behavioral science capabilities in organizations.
Who or what got you into behavioural science?
I didn’t come into behavioural science through the typical path. Unlike many who go straight into psychology, I didn’t start there. I actually started in business school, followed by a decade of consulting, trying to “close the least number of doors,” staying broad in project and portfolio management. I was that “super generic guy” managing various projects and solving organizational issues. After some time, though, I felt like I was going in circles, organizing corporations one way and then back the opposite way.
Eventually, I discovered this world of applied psychology through reading Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point—a book loaded with insights from social psychology that sparked my interest. I’d always been fascinated by psychology's descriptive nature around thoughts and decisions, but I also valued economics' prescriptive elements. Yet, back in France in the early 2000s, psychology seemed confined to academia or clinical work, which wasn’t appealing to me as I wanted to see real-world impact. Meanwhile, economics felt like too much math, which I wasn’t eager to tackle.
Once I discovered behavioural science, though, everything clicked. Books like Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow further pulled me in. I enrolled in an EDX course on behavioural economics by Dilip Solman and ultimately completed a Master’s at LSE in 2014. That’s when the real pivot happened, as I transitioned from consulting to full-time work in behavioural science.
What is the accomplishment you are proudest of as a behavioural scientist? And what do you still want to achieve?
I’m proud of the work I did with Novartis, especially in ethics, risk, and compliance. There, we tackled the complex goal of encouraging ethical behaviour across a vast and diverse organization. Unlike many behavioural projects that revolve around quick “nudges,” this initiative required a long-term approach. We first gathered data through extensive surveys to map out ethical and unethical behaviours within the company. This wasn’t just about engagement surveys but generating rigorous perception data on constructs associated with ethical behaviour.
One significant insight we uncovered was the role of psychological safety. With the help of Amy Edmondson, we explored ways to enhance psychological safety, leading to an experiment involving 1,000 managers and 9,000 team members. Simple tweaks in how managers framed one-on-one meetings significantly boosted psychological safety, encouraging employees to speak up when they noticed unethical behavior. This was a slow, data-driven effort, yet the impact was potentially profound, even though the success of ethics work can often be invisible. We don’t know exactly what misconduct was prevented, but I’m confident we made a difference in some way.
Moving forward, I believe the pharmaceutical industry, especially, could achieve much more by embracing social and behavioural science beyond just medical science. We’re built on scientific rigour in clinical trials, yet often ignore the insights of social science in other areas. I aim to advocate for embedding social science across various organizational functions—commercialization, patient adherence, and stakeholder engagement—to leverage evidence-based strategies throughout the industry.
What are the greatest challenges being faced by behavioural science, right now?
One of the biggest challenges for behavioral science today is the difficulty in establishing itself as a stable, core capability within large organizations. While companies acknowledge its value, they often treat behavioral science as an add-on—useful for occasional projects but not integral to their operations. This approach leaves the field vulnerable; when budget constraints arise, behavioral science initiatives are among the first to face cuts. Without a dedicated place within critical departments, such as HR or compliance, it becomes hard for behavioral science to prove its sustained impact or fully integrate with strategic goals.
Another challenge is how behavioral science is often marketed. Too frequently, it’s portrayed as a collection of catchy nudges or a list of cognitive biases. This oversimplification can mislead stakeholders, making them expect quick fixes rather than the gradual, science-based approach behavioral science requires. Genuine behavior change is complex; it requires structured experimental design, careful analysis, and, most importantly, time. The real work of behavioral science is about achieving small, cumulative improvements rather than dramatic, overnight transformations.
Moreover, the tendency to introduce behavioral science through the lens of “irrationality” can undermine its credibility. By focusing on human flaws, the field risks coming across as novelty rather than necessity, fostering unrealistic expectations. To secure its place in organizations, behavioral science must shift from being seen as a toolbox of quick tricks to being understood as a rigorous science. Setting realistic expectations and communicating its role as a gradual, data-driven process are essential if behavioral science is to thrive and make lasting impacts in the business world.
How do you think behavioural science will develop (in the next 10 years)?
The honest answer is that I don’t know exactly, but I see trends that suggest behavioural science has a bright future. One key trend is the faster cycle between science and practice. There’s growing permeability between academia and industry, making it easier for new insights to move quickly into corporate practice. The boundaries are fading, which is promising for the integration of behavioural science in business.
The other major trend is the expansion of data—what used to be called “big data” and now “generative AI.” With more data comes a need for experts who can analyse and interpret it. Behavioural scientists are uniquely skilled in experimental science and evidence generation, and these skills will become increasingly relevant as data grows.
Looking at the next decade, AI and behavioural science will likely intersect more, especially in fields like healthcare, where AI-driven recommendations could significantly influence human decision-making. Behavioural science will be essential in understanding how people interpret and act on AI-driven recommendations. This interaction—between human and machine decision-making—will create ample research opportunities.
Another potential is the application of AI for “synthetic experiments,” where AI-driven models could simulate human behavior. Once AI models achieve agency, we may be able to test behavioral theories at a lower cost before implementing them in the real world. As these systems evolve, behavioral science will help design AI that aligns with human values and improves decision-making processes.
With all your experience, what skills would you say are needed to be a behavioural scientist? Are there any recommendations you would make?
A good behavioural scientist, first and foremost, is a scientist. This means they need a solid understanding of causality and experimental design. It’s not just about knowing a list of biases or catchy nudges; it’s about being able to draw valid, evidence-based conclusions. Inferential statistics and rigorous methods for drawing reliable inferences are essential. At its core, behavioural science is about applying scientific processes to human behavior—knowing why something works, not just that it does.
Consulting skills are crucial, too, even if you’re an internal behavioral scientist. Much of the job involves helping others define their problems behaviorally. In large organizations, people often jump to solutions without clearly understanding the behavior they want to change. Being able to consult with stakeholders to define their problems in terms of measurable behaviors can be 80-90% of the value a behavioural scientist brings.
Another critical aspect is what I call “diagnostics” or intake skills. You need to help people articulate their problems robustly and translate them into behavioral terms that can guide the intervention. Without these foundational skills in problem definition and scientific thinking, you risk superficial “nudges” that may be flashy but lack depth or sustainability.
What advice would you give to young behavioural scientists or those looking to progress into the field?
When entering the field, think about how to combine behavioural science with a specialized area. You could integrate it with human resources, ethics, technology, or another function within an organization. In larger organizations, having a clear functional role allows you to fit into the structure and add unique value while pursuing behavioural insights. Alternatively, if you want to be a “pure” behavioural scientist, consulting firms offer a path to work across various domains.
The field is broad, so be open to adding other skills or focusing on specific sectors. This combination will allow you to make a sustained impact and navigate corporate structures where behavioural science can be challenging to position on its own.
What is your biggest frustration with the field as it stands?
A big frustration is the “magic” portrayal of behavioral science. We often see people in organizations reduce behavioral science to a list of biases or flashy nudges, which detracts from the discipline’s scientific integrity. By starting conversations with how irrational humans are or how many decisions we make daily, we risk setting unrealistic expectations. Behavioural science is not about trickery; it’s a methodical, scientific approach to improving decision-making and behavior. Presenting it as a quick fix is ultimately a disservice, as the real value lies in long-term, data-driven solutions that don’t rely on catchy buzzwords or quick nudges.
If you weren’t a behavioural scientist, what would you be doing?
If I hadn’t discovered behavioural science, I likely would have stayed on my original path in project management, working in a large corporate role, maybe as a VP of HR or business services. It’s not a far-fetched outcome; I was already on that trajectory before the field piqued my interest.
Looking back further, though, if I had been more committed in school, I might have explored political science and gone into public policy. Politics always intrigued me, and studying public policy could have been another route. I’m also fascinated by neuroscience. I even toyed with doing a PhD in neuroscience but found the timing challenging. Sometimes I wonder if I’ll return to it someday.
How do you apply behavioural science in your personal life?
Honestly, I don’t consciously apply behavioural science in my personal life. Between work and family commitments, I don’t have the cognitive bandwidth to strategize my actions at home, where I’m more of an “ordinary dad” just trying to get through the day. My kids’ routines aren’t exactly the optimal behavioural science examples—there’s more of me screaming “brush your teeth!” than nuanced incentives.
That said, behavioural science has probably made me more aware of feedback, relationship dynamics, and human cognition in general. This awareness likely influences how I interact with others, making me more mindful in my relationships. It’s less about specific “nudges” and more about a broad awareness of behavioral principles that come into play naturally.
Which other behavioural scientists would you love to read an interview by?
I highly recommend Enrique “Kike” from BBVA, one of Spain’s largest banks. Kike has built the largest behavioural science unit within any private industry, embedding behavioral scientists across product teams. The scale of BBVA’s behavioral science application is unprecedented, with over 100 people involved across various areas. Kike’s insights into scaling behavioral science within a highly regulated industry like finance would be invaluable for understanding how to embed and grow behavioral expertise within a business.
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions Antoine!
As I said before, this interview is part of a larger series which can also be found here on the blog. Make sure you don't miss any of those, nor any of the upcoming interviews!
Keep your eye on Money on the Mind!
