In addition to the one way vs two way door mental model for decision type classification, another classification method is to consider how the decision is positioned relative to time.

Here there are also two classification types; decisions made on past events vs decisions made on future scenarios (decision trees).

Decisions made on past events

It may seem somewhat obvious, but as a first step, it's necessary to step back and determine if your decision is being made on top of past events.

If it is, grounding our choices in actual historical events and robust data, both qualitative and quantitative, ensures that we speak in truths rather than assumptions.

This method aligns with the adage, “In God we trust, all others must bring data,” underscoring the importance of evidence-based reasoning in our planning and operations.

By relying on data that reflects what has already transpired or been thoroughly analyzed, we can make informed decisions that are both defensible and transparent.

This approach not only minimizes the influence of bias and subjectivity but also builds a culture of accountability and precision - aligning with one of our values; quality certified.

Decisions Made on Future Scenarios

When making decisions based on future scenarios, it is crucial to approach them with caution and a broad perspective. Rather than focusing on a single expected outcome, it's more effective to consider a range of possible scenarios, mapping out a decision tree with multiple pathways. This approach helps in anticipating various outcomes and preparing for different eventualities.

Predicting the future inherently involves uncertainties, and speaking in absolutes about outcomes that have yet to occur can be misleading and potentially hazardous.

In these scenarios, our focus should shift from merely gaining acceptance of our proposals to critically evaluating the potential consequences of their implementation. The key question to consider is not just, "What if no one agrees with my proposal?" but rather, "What if my proposal is accepted and turns out to be wrong, sub-optimal, or, in the worst cases, damaging?" Such considerations are essential, especially when decisions are irreversible and based on scenarios with no historical data to rely on.

Unknown Unknowns

The concept of "unknown unknowns" refers to the factors and variables that we are completely unaware of and cannot predict or measure in advance. Unlike "known unknowns," which are uncertainties we recognize and can plan for, unknown unknowns represent the blind spots in our understanding and planning.

Conceptually, unknown unknowns are the surprises that can derail even the most well-thought-out plans. They are the events or factors that we don't know we don't know, making them particularly challenging to anticipate and manage. This concept was popularized by former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who highlighted the distinction between what we know, what we know we don’t know, and what we don’t know we don’t know.

Speaking in absolutes

When discussing decisions, it's important to avoid absolutist language, which can create a false sense of certainty and shut down constructive dialogue. Examples of absolutist statements include:

• "This is 100% the right decision."
• "This will not work."
• "Users will not like this."
• "Users will not understand this."

Such statements can be problematic for several reasons. First, they imply that no further discussion or consideration is needed, which can stifle creativity and critical thinking. Second, they often ignore the complexities and nuances of real-world situations, leading to oversimplified and potentially flawed conclusions. Lastly, absolutist language can alienate team members who may have valuable insights or alternative perspectives, reducing the overall effectiveness of the decision-making process.

Instead of speaking in absolutes, it's more productive to use language that acknowledges uncertainty and invites collaboration. This approach encourages a more thorough examination of the issue and helps build consensus.

Consider the following alternatives;

• "These are the possible scenarios."
• "This is what may eventuate, for the positive and the negative, in each scenario."
• "Here are some potential outcomes based on the data we have."
• People might have different reactions; let's map out what those could be."

Benefits of Avoiding Absolutist Language;

1. Encourages Open Dialogue: Using flexible language invites others to contribute their thoughts and insights, leading to more comprehensive and well-rounded discussions.
2. Recognizes Complexity: Acknowledging the uncertainty and complexity of decisions helps ensure that all potential factors are considered, reducing the risk of oversight.
3. Fosters Collaboration: When team members feel their perspectives are valued, they are more likely to engage actively in the decision-making process, fostering a collaborative environment.
4. Improves Decision Quality: By exploring multiple scenarios and potential outcomes, the team can develop more robust and adaptable strategies that are better equipped to handle future uncertainties.

Practical Tips for Avoiding Absolutist Language;

• Use Probabilistic Thinking: Frame your statements in terms of likelihoods and probabilities rather than certainties. For example, say, "There's a high probability that this will succeed," instead of, "This will definitely succeed."
• Present Multiple Scenarios: Outline different possible outcomes and their associated risks and benefits. This approach helps others see the range of possibilities and prepares the team for various contingencies.
• Be Transparent About Assumptions: Clearly state the assumptions underlying your decisions and be open to questioning and revising them as new information emerges.