Decision-Making Processes

5 Decision-Making Frameworks That Transformed How I Lead RiseUpp.com Have you ever faced a crucial business decision that kept you up at night? Last week, while deciding on a major partnership, I reflected on how my decision-making process has evolved since founding RiseUpp. Here are the frameworks that guide me: The 10/10/10 Rule What will the impact be in 10 minutes, 10 months, and 10 years? This helped me prioritize long-term partnerships over quick wins. The Regret Minimization Framework Instead of asking "What's the best choice?", I ask "Which choice will I regret the least?" This led us to invest heavily in user experience over rapid expansion. The Second-Order Thinking Looking beyond immediate consequences. When we made our course comparison tool free, we lost short-term revenue but gained massive user trust and market leadership. The Eisenhower Matrix Urgent vs Important. This saved me from countless "urgent" meetings that weren't moving us toward our vision of democratizing education. The Jeff Bezos "70% Rule" If you have 70% of the information needed, make the decision. Waiting for 100% certainty cost us early opportunities. Now we move faster. The most valuable lesson? These frameworks aren't rigid rules – they're tools. Sometimes, you need to combine them or trust your instinct. What decision-making frameworks do you rely on? Share your experiences below. #Leadership #DecisionMaking #CEOLife #StartupGrowth #BusinessStrategy #EdTech #RiseUpp #OnlineEducation #CareerGrowth #ExecutiveDecisions #StrategicThinking #BusinessLeadership #StartupLife #EntrepreneurMindset #ProfessionalDevelopment

𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐂𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲 -𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 101! If there's one professional muscle I've had to strengthen over the years it's decision-making. Big decisions never arrive with complete information, total confidence, or perfect timing. Whether it's a career pivot, a leadership call, or a team decision, most choices are made in motion. And while I’ve had my share of doubt and overthinking, I’ve also learned a few simple tools that consistently help me move from noise... to clarity. Here are six decision-making “cheat codes” that have worked for me: 1. 𝐖𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐫! Not in a digital note. Not in a chat. Paper. When you put thoughts on paper, something shifts. It slows down your mind. It brings structure to chaos. You start seeing patterns instead of spirals. Half the fog clears just by writing it all out. 2. 𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥—𝐨𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 Ask yourself: - What do I want to 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞? - And how do I 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥 once I do? Sometimes the goal is progress. Sometimes it’s peace. Once the outcome is clear, both in terms of results and emotions the right path often starts revealing itself. 3.𝐓𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 This one always grounds me.Ask: “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺?” It removes ego, urgency, and fear—and brings in long-term wisdom. It's about alignment with who you’re becoming, not just who you are now. 4.𝐃𝐨 𝐚 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐭-𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐜𝐤 And if that happens, can I handle it? This isn’t about being pessimistic—it’s about being prepared. Naming your fear makes it less powerful. And more often than not you realise the fear isn’t as big as it felt. 5.𝐒𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 24 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 Make a tentative decision. Then pause. Check in with yourself. - Does your body feel lighter? - Or is there tension you can’t ignore? Sometimes our instincts speak before our logic catches up. Give them space to speak. 6. 𝐑𝐮𝐧 𝐢𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 Not your closest friend. Not your manager Someone with no emotional stake just perspective. A sharp, unbiased mind can reflect your truth back to you more clearly than your own mirror sometimes. No framework is foolproof. But when you combine structure with self-awareness, decisions become less about pressure and more about alignment. What’s one tool or ritual you use when you’re making a difficult decision?

Human decisions aren’t static moments - they’re unfolding processes. We don’t just pick an option; we accumulate evidence, shift attention, and adapt as we go. Traditional models assume fixed preferences and perfect rationality, but real choices are fluid. Our goals change, confidence fluctuates, and uncertainty shapes every step. Modern choice modeling captures this dynamic reality. It starts with probabilistic thinking, accepting that people rarely make identical decisions twice. Signal detection theory adds nuance by showing how we decide whether evidence is strong enough to act. Sequential sampling models go further, tracing how information builds until a decision threshold is reached. These models can predict not just what people choose, but how long it takes and how sure they are. As choices grow more complex, preference itself becomes a moving target. Decision field models show how attention alternates between attributes - why adding one more product, feature, or design element can unexpectedly shift preference. Reinforcement learning explains how feedback shapes these patterns over time, connecting the psychology of experience to the brain’s reward system and showing how people balance habit with goal-driven behavior. More recently, two powerful frameworks are reshaping how uncertainty is understood. Quantum cognitive models treat thought as a superposition of possible states - explaining why order, framing, and context change our responses. Bayesian approaches describe how beliefs stabilize as evidence accumulates. Together, they capture the full arc of decision-making: the fluid, evolving states of thought and the structured updating of belief. Choice, in this view, isn’t random or irrational. It’s the result of dynamic, probabilistic systems shaped by attention, learning, and memory. Understanding these mechanisms gives us a more realistic foundation for design, policy, and AI - one that models how people truly decide, not how we wish they did.

Today marks one year since we lost Professor Ron Howard. Ron was one of the pioneers of decision analysis, a Stanford professor who shaped how thousands of people think about complex choices. His work changed my life, and it continues to change the lives of everyone I teach. Every single time I teach about decision-making, I share his framework. It's elegant, powerful, and cuts through the confusion that paralyzes so many people facing big decisions. The 3-Legged Stool Framework: Every decision has three core components, like a three-legged stool. Remove any leg, and the stool collapses. 🎯 Values (Objectives) – What actually matters to you in the outcome? Not what you think should matter, but what genuinely does. 🛣️ Alternatives (Options) – What are the different paths you could take? (If there are no options, there's no decision to be made.) 📊 Information – How does each option help you achieve your objectives? What do you know, and what do you need to find out? This framework transforms decision-making from overwhelming to manageable. I've watched leaders and individuals use this approach to gain clarity on everything from product strategy to career transitions. It works because it externalizes the chaos in your head and organizes it into something you can actually work with. Ron's legacy lives on every time someone uses this framework to make a better decision. Every time someone moves from paralysis to clarity. Every time someone realizes that good decision-making isn't about having perfect information – it's about having a clear process. I'm grateful for Ron's teachings, and I'm committed to keeping his work alive by empowering others to make decisions with confidence. What framework or tool has most shaped how you make decisions? Society of Decision Professionals (SDP) | A Great Decision Every Time #decisionanalysis #decisionmaking #decisionprofessionals

C-level leaders get to places most people won’t because they make decisions differently. I helped build the data and AI decision-support platforms for some of the largest companies in the US over the last decade. Here’s a simple primer to go from tactical and operational to strategic decision-making. Tactical minds spend their time making decisions and improving the decisions they make. We’re taught to scrutinize decisions and improve one decision at a time. It sounds great, but it’s the slowest path to improvement. Operational minds spend their time understanding and improving their decision-making process. High-quality leadership training programs teach a structured decision-making process and decision hygiene best practices. Operational decision-makers spend years finding and perfecting a decision-making process that works for them. However, when the pressure’s high, they deviate from the process, and all that work fails when they need it most. Strategic minds spend their time understanding why they make the decisions they do and improving their alignment with their goals and desired outcomes. Great decisions begin with a mission, vision, and purpose. Strategic minds stand out through their outcomes-based focus and forward-looking decisions. The goal isn’t perfect decisions or process. It’s perfect alignment and singular direction.

I was on a cliff, we needed to get down, and I couldn't tell if our rope reached the ground. It was getting dark and a bad situation was about to get worse. "Decision time!" As the heaviest of the three climbers, I volunteered to go first, because if our rope held me, it would hold the other two. I went over the edge with our extra gear, planning on figuring out some way down, quickly. The way to move up is to gain more trust from those above you. Building this trust starts with consistently making critical decisions quickly and well. Here is a system I developed to make better decisions based on my time as an Amazon VP: Good decision-making isn’t just about intelligence and judgment; it’s about having a repeatable system that can help you decide with speed and accuracy. That system should help you: a) Avoid false choices by expanding your option set b) Surface and test your assumptions early c) Seek the right expert input at the right altitude d) Manage emotional bias before it clouds your thinking e) Monitor outcomes with clear tripwires and signals Too often, we force ourselves into suboptimal decisions because we fail to do the things above. We falsely feel the need to choose between two bad options, we don’t test assumptions, we go it alone, and we let our emotions hijack the process. The goal of the system is to avoid those mistakes and open up opportunities for better decisions rather than locking ourselves into the bad ones. In this week’s newsletter, I break down the exact framework I developed and how you can apply it to your own work. Read the full post here: https://buff.ly/VfRNVPD As for my descent down the cliff, I used a variation of the same quick decision making to get us all off the mountain. We had started a climb, gotten halfway up, and realized that we were moving too slowly to finish the climb before dark. Given this, we then had to get down from the middle of the cliff face by constructing our own alternative way down. From the process above: a) We did consider options - keep going up, retrace the way we had come, or bail out over the nearby cliff edge. The cliff was fastest. b) Our assumption was that the way we secured the rope would hold. We tugged on it (tested it) and then as the heaviest person, I went first. c) We didn't have any experts handy, so we skipped this step. d) I did freeze (emotion) at the cliff edge. My good friend gently said, "Ethan, it's getting dark." He got me moving before I could become paralyzed. e) I had the extra gear in case things went wrong. At first I could not tell if the rope was long enough or not. Loops of the rope had caught on trees and bushes, so I had to lower myself down, committing irrevocably to the descent, and untangle the mess. Once that was done, I found that the rope stretched with my weight, just enough to get my feet in the ground. My friends followed and we walked down the mountainside in the dark.

Most people don't understand the difference between making a decision and making a choice. They're easy to confuse - ultimately, both involve selecting one option over others. But there's a key difference. A choice is casual. It’s automatic. You pick from a range of options without much thought. Conversely, a decision is deliberate. It requires mental effort, weighing alternatives, and making a judgment on what’s best. I've touched before on my inability to make decisions at the start of my journey. On reflection, for a time I switched to making choices. It was easier to go with my gut and react impulsively with the belief that at least I was moving quickly. But this approach led to inconsistent outcomes. I had to learn that a decision isn’t just picking between options - it’s about having a process to get there. You need to ask yourself: 🔍 What problem am I solving here? 💡 What are my options and their potential outcomes? ⚖️ What does my judgment tell me about which option is the best one? 💬 How am I positioned to best execute on this option? If you want to make better decisions, here’s how you can start: 1️⃣ Define the problem clearly - If you can’t articulate what you’re solving, how can you judge the best option? 2️⃣ Explore possible solutions - Determine the best ways to tackle your problem. 3️⃣ Evaluate all your options - List them out and think through each approach. Make a judgment - Conclude which option is best with the information available to you. 4️⃣ Commit to it – Don’t second guess yourself once you’ve made your decision. Execute and trust the process. When an outcome can be easily reversed, it's sometimes still better to decide instinctively and quickly. But when it's not, deciding becomes hard. That's when you need a repeatable process to follow. It's time to make sure your decisions count.

If you don't have a Champion, then you can't qualify the Decision Process. If you can't qualify the Decision Process then you can't qualify the deal. And if you can't qualify the deal, then you can't justify investing your time and resources into it (let alone putting it anywhere near a forecast 😬). This is just one of the reasons why we say #NAMIE (Not All MEDDIC Is Equal). So many sellers consider the Decision Process in isolation from other letters. 🚨 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 🚨 The Decision Process 𝗜𝗦𝗡'𝗧 the process of 𝗧𝗛𝗘 decision to buy your solution or not. It's the customers' process of making 𝗠𝗨𝗟𝗧𝗜𝗣𝗟𝗘 decisions throughout an engagement: • Whether to evaluate a solution in the first place? • Which vendors to involve? • Which stakeholders to involve? • What should be in the Decision Criteria? (𝘛𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭, 𝘌𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭, 𝘙𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱) • How will the vendors be evaluated?  (𝘋𝘦𝘮𝘰? 𝘙𝘍𝘐/𝘗? 𝘗𝘖𝘊? 𝘗𝘖𝘝? 𝘙𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴?) • What are the steps for technical approval? • What are the steps for business approval? • How will the business case be constructed?  (𝘝𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘰𝘳? 3𝘳𝘥 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺? 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺?) • What are the formal steps?  (𝘚𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘓𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭, 𝘦𝘵𝘤.) • What are the steps from Business and Technical approval to signature? And so so many more... And every company and engagement will be different... 𝗛𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝘆: The Decision Process needs a 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗶𝗼𝗻 to advise, confirm, and support its progress. The Decision Process must connect to the value elements of 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀, and 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗮 to ensure consensus on the unique value your solution can bring to EVERY stakeholder and ensure urgency remains. The Decision Process must connect to the 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Not just the rival solutions but competing initiatives, so your deal doesn't get de-prioritized. The Decision Process must include the 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗕𝘂𝘆𝗲𝗿's sponsorship. The Decision Process must align with the 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁, ideally the customer's or, at worst, an event you have created based upon customer value (𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘬𝘦). And, of course, the Decision Process and 𝗣𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 are like two best friends that should go everywhere together in step 🤝. The best bit of all? Your Champion is highly unlikely to be a professional buyer. They won't know the best approach to buying a solution like yours. This creates an opportunity for professional sellers to position themselves as trusted advisors by helping curate and map out the Decision Process with their customers. Did I miss anything? 🤔 What are your tips for building a solid and collaborative Decision Process? #MEDDIC #MEDDICC #MEDDPICC #DecisionProcess #Sales  

👩⚕️👨🔬 When 52 professionals from the pharmaceutical industry looked at the same drug cases… their judgments ranged from “absolutely go” ✅ to “absolutely no-go” ❌. In theory, go/no-go decisions in drug development should be guided by logic, data, and a shared understanding of risk. In practice? A study by Cowlrick et al. reveals that even seasoned professionals - across R&D, pharmacoeconomics, and marketing - show wide variability in their judgments when presented with the same incomplete but realistic case data. 💡 Why is this important? It shows how incomplete information, intuition, and potentially bias, shape some of the most expensive bets in our industry. 🎓 And it’s not just about having more experience or education… More years in the industry or higher education didn’t reliably produce more coherent decisions. 👉 The takeaway: Smoothing out individual variability to make more reliable decisions requires a range of perspectives - think “wisdom of crowds” 🧠 kind of thinking. What could that look like in practice (my take): 1️⃣ Ensure diversity of perspective across decision gates – cross-functional review panels that deliberately mix backgrounds (R&D, commercial, regulatory, medical) to counteract siloed thinking and reduce bias amplification. 2️⃣ Train for decision-making under uncertainty – use scenario simulations, pre-mortems, and other tools to improve judgment when information is incomplete. 3️⃣ De-bias the process, not just the people – embed devil’s advocates 🕵️♂️ and independent second looks so the process itself catches what individuals might miss. 🚀 Let's not forget, better decisions are one of the levers to improve the probabilities of success in our industry - and therefore the productivity of our innovation engine. The cost of getting it wrong aren’t just failed assets. It’s the wasted resources that could be used to elsewhere (opportunity cost). How do you make sure your decision processes catch - and counter this hidden variability? Paper: Cowlrick, I., Hedner, T., Wolf, R., Olausson, M. and Klofsten, M. (2011), Decision-making in the pharmaceutical industry. R&D Manage, 41: 321-336. ------ Hi, I’m Martin, and I’m passionate about learning and exploring how we can improve value creation across biopharma. If you enjoy posts like these, or want to discuss how to drive more value in the industry - let’s connect! #Innovation #DecisionMaking #Biopharma

Want to make better decisions? It’s simpler than you think… Stop making so many. The average adult makes 30,000+ decisions a day. From the moment you wake up it never ends. What time to get up. What to eat. What to make the kids for breakfast. Whether to train or rest. Which email to answer first. When to check messages. What to push. What can wait. What can’t. None of these feel heavy. But together? They’re exhausting. As responsibility grows — team, family, business, pressure — decisions don’t just increase. They compound. That’s where decision fatigue sets in. Not as burnout. As friction. From a brain standpoint, this is straightforward. Decision-making relies on the prefrontal cortex, the same system responsible for focus, impulse control, and judgment. As it gets taxed, decision quality drops. You don’t feel “tired.” You feel: Shorter patience. Sloppier output. Busy, but less effective. So the solution is fewer decisions. If you want high decision quality under pressure, you have to offload the easy ones. Not with hacks. With pre-decisions. (Call them rules, defaults, standards — the label doesn’t matter.) The process is simple: Notice the decisions you make over and over. Decide once, on your best day, and turn it into a default. Stick to it long enough that it stops costing attention. This isn’t rigidity. It’s respect for cognitive bandwidth. Elite performers don’t win by making better decisions all day. They win by protecting the system that makes the important ones. Fewer choices. Cleaner thinking. Reliable execution when it counts. That’s how decision quality actually scales.