Decision Matrix

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when you need to:

• Compare multiple business options using objective, weighted criteria
• Make a hiring, vendor, tool, or strategy decision with clear reasoning
• Remove emotional bias from a business choice by scoring options systematically
• Document decision rationale for stakeholders or future reference

DO NOT use this skill for simple yes/no decisions, personal life choices, or decisions where one option is already clearly superior. This is for complex, multi-criteria business decisions.

Core Principle

A DECISION MATRIX DOES NOT MAKE THE DECISION FOR YOU — IT MAKES YOUR THINKING VISIBLE SO YOU CAN SPOT WHERE INTUITION AND DATA AGREE OR CONFLICT.

Phase 1: Frame the Decision

Define the decision clearly before building the matrix.

Required Inputs

Decision Types and Suggested Criteria

GATE: Confirm the decision statement, options, and criteria before building the matrix.

Phase 2: Weight and Score

Build the matrix with weighted criteria and score each option.

Weighting Criteria

Assign weights that total 100% across all criteria:

## Criteria Weights

| Criteria | Weight | Rationale |
|----------|--------|-----------|
| Revenue impact | 30% | Directly tied to business goal |
| Implementation effort | 25% | Limited resources as solopreneur |
| Risk level | 20% | Cannot afford major setbacks |
| Time to results | 15% | Need wins within 90 days |
| Scalability | 10% | Important but not urgent |
| **Total** | **100%** | |

Scoring Options

Score each option 1-5 on every criterion with brief justification:

## Decision Matrix: [Decision Statement]

| Criteria | Weight | Option A | Score | Option B | Score | Option C | Score |
|----------|--------|----------|-------|----------|-------|----------|-------|
| Revenue impact | 30% | [rationale] | 4 | [rationale] | 3 | [rationale] | 5 |
| Effort | 25% | [rationale] | 3 | [rationale] | 5 | [rationale] | 2 |
| Risk | 20% | [rationale] | 4 | [rationale] | 4 | [rationale] | 3 |
| Time to results | 15% | [rationale] | 5 | [rationale] | 3 | [rationale] | 2 |
| Scalability | 10% | [rationale] | 3 | [rationale] | 4 | [rationale] | 5 |

## Weighted Scores

| Option | Weighted Score | Rank |
|--------|---------------|------|
| Option A | 3.80 | 1 |
| Option C | 3.40 | 2 |
| Option B | 3.85 | 1 |

GATE: Present the scored matrix and get user validation on scores before delivering the recommendation.

Phase 3: Recommend

Deliver a clear recommendation with reasoning.

Recommendation Format

## Recommendation

**Winner:** [Option] with a weighted score of [X.XX]

**Why this wins:** [2-3 sentences explaining the key differentiators]

**Key trade-off:** [What you give up by choosing this option vs. the runner-up]

**Gut check:** Does this match your intuition? If the matrix says Option A but your gut says Option B, examine which criteria might be underweighted.

Sensitivity Analysis

Test whether the result holds if weights shift:

• "If you increased [criteria] weight by 10%, [Option X] would overtake [Option Y]"
• Flag any decision where the top two options are within 0.3 points — this means the decision is close and additional factors may matter

Risk Flags

Note any option that scores below 2 on a high-weight criterion, even if the total score is high. A single critical weakness can sink an otherwise strong option.

Phase 4: Document

Provide a decision record for future reference.

Decision Record Template

## Decision Record

**Decision:** [Statement]
**Date:** [Date]
**Decision maker:** [Name]
**Chosen option:** [Option]
**Weighted score:** [X.XX]
**Key reasons:** [3 bullet points]
**Key risks:** [Known risks of the chosen option]
**Review date:** [When to evaluate if this was the right call]

Anti-Patterns

• Too many criteria — more than 7 criteria dilutes the signal. Force-rank and keep the top 5-7.
• Equal weights — giving every criterion 20% means you have not thought about what matters most.
• Scoring without justification — a score of 4 means nothing without a one-line rationale.
• Ignoring gut disagreement — if the matrix says one thing and your instinct says another, the weights are probably wrong.
• Using a matrix for obvious decisions — if you already know the answer, do not build a matrix to justify it.

Recovery

• User cannot identify criteria: Suggest 5 based on the decision type (see table above) and ask them to remove any that do not apply.
• Options are too similar: Add differentiating criteria or increase the scoring granularity to 1-10 instead of 1-5.
• Scores are all 3s: Challenge the user — "A 3 means average. Is this option truly average on [criteria], or is it actually a 2 or 4?" Push for honest differentiation.
• User disagrees with the result: Ask which score they would change. Often one re-scored criterion flips the result, revealing what they actually value most.
• Stakeholders disagree on weights: Have each stakeholder assign weights independently, then average them. Discuss any criteria where weights diverge by more than 15%.