Chapter 19: Decision Criteria: Making the Choice Defensible

Chapter 19: Decision Criteria: Making the Choice Defensible

Video: Decision Matrix Shows Judges Exactly How You Made Your Recommendation

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

• develop criteria that reflect the actual case decision
• distinguish criteria from evidence
• prioritise criteria
• use weighted criteria when appropriate
• compare alternatives objectively
• explain why the winning alternative wins

Why This Matters

Without clear decision criteria, teams often choose an alternative because: "It just seemed like the best option." That isn't enough. Judges should be able to see:

• Here were the choices.
• Here is how we evaluated them.
• Here is why this one wins.

Discover Your Mad Skills Principle

If you can’t explain why your recommendation wins, you haven’t finished the decision.

Where Criteria Come From

Criteria should come from the case. They may include:

• strategic fit;
• financial impact;
•  customer value;
•  implementation feasibility;
• risk;
• speed;
• sustainability;
• organisational capability;
• stakeholder impact;
• mission and vision.

Good Criteria

A good criterion is:

• Relevant: It matters to the decision.
• Discriminating: It helps distinguish between alternatives.
• Measurable: You can evaluate it using evidence.
• Defensible: You can explain why it matters.

The Criteria Test

For each proposed criterion, ask:

• Does this matter to the decision?
• Can it distinguish between alternatives?
• Can we support our assessment?

If the answer is no, remove it.

Weighted Decision Matrix

When appropriate, assign weights to criteria based on importance. For example:

Criterion	Weight
Financial impact	30%
Strategic fit	25%
Customer value	20%
Feasibility	15%
Risk	10%

Then score each alternative. The exact numbers are less important than the logic behind them.

Coach's Lens

A decision matrix is not a magic answer generator. If your team manipulates the weights until your favourite alternative wins, you've missed the point. The matrix should make your reasoning more transparent, not disguise subjective judgment as mathematics.

Common Mistakes

• Generic Criteria
• "Good for the company" isn't a useful criterion.
• Too Many Criteria
• More criteria don't necessarily improve the decision.
• Equal Weighting Without Thought
• Not everything matters equally.
• False Precision
• A score of 8.7 versus 8.5 doesn't mean the decision is scientifically proven.
• Criteria That Appear After the Decision
• Your criteria should help make the decision—not justify a decision already made.

Mad Skills Drill

Take your three alternatives. Develop five possible criteria. Reduce them to the three or four that matter most. Explain why each criterion matters. Then evaluate your alternatives. Finally ask: Would I still choose the same recommendation without the scoring table? If not, investigate why.

Chapter Summary

Decision criteria turn: "We like this option." into: "This option wins because it best meets the requirements of the decision." That makes your recommendation more defensible.

Key Takeaways

✓ Criteria should emerge from the case.

✓ Prioritise what matters most.

✓ Use evidence to evaluate alternatives.

✓ Use weighted scoring carefully.

✓ Don't let the matrix replace judgment.

Looking Ahead

A strategic choice is incomplete until you know whether it creates enough value. That brings us to the financial and quantitative test.