--- name: "meta-decision-analysis" description: "Apply structured decision analysis using decision matrices, decision trees, expected value, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Use this skill when the user faces a complex decision with multiple options and criteria, needs to compare alternatives objectively, quantify risk vs reward, or facilitate group decisions — even if they say 'which option should we choose', 'help me decide', 'how do we compare these options', or 'what's the expected outcome'." metadata: category: "WP-22 跨學科" tags: ["meta-thinking", "decision-analysis", "decision-matrix"] --- # Decision Analysis ## Framework ``` IRON LAW: Make Criteria and Weights Explicit BEFORE Evaluating Options Choosing criteria after seeing the options lets bias sneak in — you unconsciously weight criteria that favor your preferred option. Define criteria, assign weights, THEN score options. ``` ### Decision Matrix (Weighted Scoring) 1. **List alternatives** (3-6 options including "do nothing") 2. **Define criteria** (4-8 factors that matter) 3. **Weight criteria** (must sum to 100%) 4. **Score each option** per criterion (1-5 or 1-10) 5. **Calculate weighted total** = Σ(score × weight) 6. **Sensitivity check**: Does the winner change if you adjust the top-weighted criterion? ### Decision Tree (Sequential Decisions Under Uncertainty) For decisions with uncertainty and sequential steps: 1. Map decision nodes (squares) and chance nodes (circles) 2. Assign probabilities to chance outcomes (must sum to 1.0) 3. Assign payoffs to terminal nodes 4. Calculate Expected Value = Σ(probability × payoff) 5. Choose the branch with highest EV (or best risk-adjusted outcome) ### Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) For complex decisions with competing stakeholder priorities: 1. Each stakeholder defines their criteria and weights independently 2. Aggregate into a combined weighted matrix 3. Identify where stakeholders agree (easy decisions) and disagree (requires negotiation) ## Output Format ```markdown # Decision Analysis: {Decision} ## Alternatives 1. {Option A} 2. {Option B} 3. {Option C} ## Decision Matrix | Criterion | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C | |-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------| | {criterion 1} | {X%} | {1-5} | {1-5} | {1-5} | | **Weighted Total** | 100% | **{total}** | **{total}** | **{total}** | ## Sensitivity Analysis - If {criterion} weight changes from X% to Y%, winner changes from {A} to {B} ## Recommendation {Winner with rationale and key trade-offs acknowledged} ``` ## Gotchas - **"Do nothing" is always an option**: Include it as a baseline. Sometimes the best decision is to wait. - **Scores are subjective**: A score of "4" from one person ≠ "4" from another. Calibrate by defining what each score means before scoring. - **Expected value ignores risk preference**: EV of $50 (certain) vs EV of $50 (50% chance of $0, 50% chance of $100) are equal by EV but feel very different. For high-stakes decisions, use risk-adjusted metrics. - **Analysis paralysis**: Decision analysis should accelerate decisions, not delay them. Set a time limit for the analysis. ## References - For decision tree software tools, see `references/decision-tools.md`