high-stakes-decisions

Use the 70% information rule: commit to a direction once you have roughly 70% of the data you want, since waiting longer destroys momentum. Pair this with pre-defined kill criteria so you can reverse course objectively if signals turn negative.

SPADE (Setting, People, Alternatives, Decide, Explain) is a full process best for major strategy-level decisions with a single responsible decider. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) is lighter-weight and best when you mainly need to clarify roles in the decision process.

Imagine the project failed six months from now, then have each member silently write tigers (real threats), paper tigers (perceived risks), and elephants (unspoken issues). Share, vote on the scariest tiger, and have the leader build an action plan with kill criteria.

Skip frameworks for low-stakes, reversible choices—the 'kombucha scale' test. Overusing frameworks on trivial decisions signals lack of trust in judgment and slows the organization; reserve them for high-risk, costly-to-unwind calls.

Separate your identity from the project and evaluate it on future utility rather than resources already invested. Set kill criteria at project start and use a neutral third party, since fear and attachment distort your own predictions.