| > but bad decisions usually stem from incorrectly answering one of these questions. Then change your answers. For me, this kind of method of assigning numbers to aspects of a choice and combining them in some way is there not to be an oracle, but to direct your thoughts or discussions within a group. For example, if you gut tells you a feature is definitely worth it, but a tool like this says it’s only borderline useful, that shouldn’t make you immediately discard the feature, but make you consider - whether the list of aspects is complete - whether you judged the existing ones correctly - whether your gut was right (e.g. if your gut says its worth it, but you also think its hard to implement and only moderately useful. Clearly, something is wrong or missing there) When making a group decision, a big advantage is that this moves you from exchanging opinions “I think we should do A; you think we should do B” to more concrete discussion “I think it’s worth a lot and easy to implement; you think its worth something but too hard to support for what it’s worth. Let’s discuss those two separately”. Items about which there’s strong disagreement even after discussion may even trigger postponement “let’s get a better idea about how hard/useful this is first” The only way to make an informed decision is by thresholding on some number scale, but as you say, it also is impossible to assign numbers to aspects of a solution. |