Smart Choices¶
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, & Raiffa, H. (1999). Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions. Harvard Business School Press.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 4 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Commensurability
- Mature carbon-pricing regimes therefore include scheduled audits of which dimensions are inside and outside the price (e.g., whether ecological non-substitutables are excluded), reviewed against new evidence and stakeholder input rather than locked in indefinitely, an iterative discipline Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) recommend as a generic feature of structured decision-making with multiple objectives.
This sourceDevelops the PrOACT framework (Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Tradeoffs, plus Uncertainty, Risk Tolerance, Linked Decisions) for structured multiple-objective decisions; supports the claim that keeping a commensuration scheme's embedded choices visible and revisable is a generic feature of structured decision-making.
- Mature carbon-pricing regimes therefore include scheduled audits of which dimensions are inside and outside the price (e.g., whether ecological non-substitutables are excluded), reviewed against new evidence and stakeholder input rather than locked in indefinitely, an iterative discipline Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) recommend as a generic feature of structured decision-making with multiple objectives.
- Reversibility and Irreversibility
- This shifts the decision logic from binary choice to adaptive sequencing: reversible moves gather information with low downside; irreversible moves should be made only when information is sufficient and alignment is high, an approach Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) embed in their PrOACT framework for everyday decision-making.
This sourceDevelops the PrOACT framework (Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Tradeoffs, Uncertainty, Risk Tolerance, Linked Decisions): reframes decisions as adaptive sequencing rather than binary choices, integrating reversibility and learning over time.
- This shifts the decision logic from binary choice to adaptive sequencing: reversible moves gather information with low downside; irreversible moves should be made only when information is sufficient and alignment is high, an approach Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) embed in their PrOACT framework for everyday decision-making.
- Reversibility Horizon
- Rather than treating all commitment problems as similar, it distinguishes between decisions that are still reversible (high optionality) and decisions that have crossed the horizon (committed paths)—a distinction Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) operationalize in their PrOACT framework for staged commitment under uncertainty.
This sourceDevelops the PrOACT framework (Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Tradeoffs, Uncertainty, Risk Tolerance, Linked Decisions): reframes decisions as adaptive sequencing rather than binary choices, integrating reversibility and learning over time.
- Rather than treating all commitment problems as similar, it distinguishes between decisions that are still reversible (high optionality) and decisions that have crossed the horizon (committed paths)—a distinction Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) operationalize in their PrOACT framework for staged commitment under uncertainty.
- Sunk Cost and Irreversible Commitment
- A core function of naming sunk-cost and irreversible-commitment dynamics is to distinguish between forward-looking rational choice and backward-looking psychological commitment, a separation that Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) place at the center of practical decision hygiene.
This sourceDevelops the PrOACT framework (Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Tradeoffs, Uncertainty, Risk Tolerance, Linked Decisions): reframes decisions as adaptive sequencing rather than binary choices, integrating reversibility and learning over time.
- A core function of naming sunk-cost and irreversible-commitment dynamics is to distinguish between forward-looking rational choice and backward-looking psychological commitment, a separation that Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa (1999) place at the center of practical decision hygiene.
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:0009138dea88 · see in the full table