Generate viable options: choose and evidence value fast
Decision makers want to see that alternatives have been considered, trade-offs are transparent, and evidence is proportional to the stage. The challenge is producing enough to build confidence without slowing momentum with months of analysis.
Why options matter
Whether in a government review, an investor board, or an internal strategy session, reviewers expect to see more than one path forward. A single “preferred option” looks like a foregone conclusion. Generating and documenting at least three credible options demonstrates rigour and strengthens buy-in.
Four steps to faster cases
- Clear options: Always include a do-nothing, a do-minimum, and at least one ambitious alternative.
- Consistent criteria: Compare every option against outcomes, risks, speed, and cost — a simple structure that makes trade-offs explicit.
- Evidence in proportion: Match the depth of analysis to the decision stage. Early concepts need ranges and assumptions; final approvals need detail and assurance.
- Transparent trade-offs: Use the Value Map Framework to put the “why, what, how, and now” on one page.
Avoiding common pitfalls
- Producing hundreds of pages that obscure the real decision.
- Skipping viable alternatives because they seem politically unpalatable.
- Using inconsistent criteria so options cannot be compared.
- Over-analysing early ideas instead of getting to a decision rhythm.
Faster reviews, stronger buy-in
This approach keeps evidence lean, makes trade-offs visible, and builds a repeatable rhythm for decision making. It avoids surprises, creates a clear audit trail, and makes it easy for reviewers to say “yes” without hesitation.
That is how Clarity. makes confident choices simple: helping leaders show options and value quickly, in a way that is defensible and easy to understand.