Decision-Making Checklist

Frame the decision and how reversible it is, compare real options on criteria you set before scoring, check for the biases that bend judgment, imagine the failure in advance, then decide and book the review.

The biases this page checks for are strong research (Wason, 1960; Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). The pre-mortem (Klein, 2007) and the decision bias checklist (Kahneman, Lovallo & Sibony, 2011) are practitioner tools. Reversibility, the weights and regret minimization are rules of thumb.

Use it when:

• A decision is hard to reverse, or costly if wrong: a hire, a contract, an investment, a reorganization.
• You notice you have already made up your mind and want to check that it holds.
• A group is converging fast and nobody has argued for another option.

Skip it when:

• The decision is small and easy to undo: decide, try it and learn from the result.
• You are choosing how much to involve your team rather than what to decide: use 3.16 Decision Style Matrix.

Judgment goes wrong in predictable directions. People test a favored hypothesis by looking for confirmation rather than refutation (Wason, 1960), and under uncertainty they rely on mental shortcuts that mostly help but bias systematically: anchoring on the first number or option, and overweighting whatever comes easily to mind (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). The evidence that these biases exist is strong. The evidence that any particular ritual removes them is much thinner. The pre-mortem (Klein, 2007) and the executive bias checklist (Kahneman, Lovallo & Sibony, 2011) are practitioner tools, built on the sound observation that bias is easier to spot in a process than in your own head.

So the page splits the decision into steps a bias would otherwise skip. Step 1 sizes the effort to how reversible the decision is. Step 2 sets criteria before scoring and demands real alternatives, so the first option cannot anchor unopposed. Step 3 names the traps and makes failure discussable before it happens, and Step 4 treats your gut as data to reconcile, not a verdict.

Write the decision as a choice, name one owner, and mark how reversible it is. A decision that is hard to undo deserves every step; an easy-to-undo one may only need Steps 1 and 4.

Strong answer: "Whether to replace our two oldest delivery vans with electric vans this year or keep running them for two more years. Owner: me, as operations manager. Hard to reverse: a five-year lease. Decide by the budget meeting on 12 March." Not: "Think about the fleet."

The decision, as a choice:

Owner (one role):

Reversibility: ☐ Hard to reverse: go slow, use every step ☐ Easy to reverse: decide fast and learn

Decide by:

Who must be consulted, and who can veto:

The most important thing you do not know, and the fastest way to find out:

Illustrative example: the business, the roles and all numbers are made up.

The operations manager at a family-owned bakery in Finland with daily deliveries to forty shops decides whether to replace two delivery vans.

Step 1: keep the old vans for two more years, or lease electric vans now. Hard to reverse (a five-year lease). Decide by the March budget meeting. The co-owner can veto.

Step 2: criteria: five-year cost (weight 5), winter reliability (4), driver acceptance (2). Option A, two electric vans: 4, 4, 3. Option B, two new diesel vans: 3, 4, 4. Option C, keep the old vans: 4, 1, 4. Weighted totals: A 42, B 39, C 32.

Step 3: she ticks anchoring (the first supplier quote set the price range) and gets a second quote. Pre-mortem: the depot charger was not ready; winter range fell short on the longest route; drivers were never asked. She adds a January route test and a drivers' meeting.

Step 4: lease two electric vans, conditional on the route test. Drivers hear it first, with the reasons. Review on 1 October.