Protocol
Write the objectives before inventing the options
The options you notice first should not get to define what you care about.
When it fits
- A decision starts from two visible alternatives and the conversation is already becoming a comparison of them.
When to avoid it
- Do not create a ceremonial objective list for trivial decisions; use this where the first visible alternatives may be constraining the problem.
Why it matters
List the outcomes the decision is meant to achieve before expanding or scoring alternatives. Separate what must be protected from what would be nice to improve. Then use each objective as a prompt for additional options. This can turn a narrow A-versus-B choice into a better decision opportunity.
Steps
- State the decision in neutral terms without naming a preferred option.
- List the outcomes that matter independently of the current alternatives.
- Mark hard constraints separately from objectives to improve.
- Generate at least one option from each important objective before comparing.
An example
Instead of comparing two microphones immediately, start with the actual objectives: intelligibility, desk fit, noise rejection, monitoring, cost and compatibility.
Check your result
At least one useful option or design change appears that was not present in the original A-versus-B framing.
Keep this limit in mind
- Do not create a ceremonial objective list for trivial decisions; use this where the first visible alternatives may be constraining the problem.
Connected ideas
Use beforeDraw decisions, uncertainties and value on one page
Evidence and sources
Decision-analysis literature treats value-focused thinking as a problem-structuring approach that starts from objectives rather than only from already visible alternatives.
Simple low-stakes choices may not justify formal objective elicitation.
Fifty years of decision analysis in operational research: A review · Value-focused thinking section