Review candidate judgments before confidence, first impressions or outcome stories become stronger than the evidence.
Open →Decision technique
Predefined decision criteria
Fix the comparison dimensions before a preferred option makes the criteria move.
When to use
A specific reasoning move for a specific problem.
Hiring, vendor selection, product prioritization, career choices and evaluations.
Procedure
Run the technique.
- Write the decision goal.
- Choose a small set of criteria before reviewing options.
- Define how evidence maps to each criterion.
- Score or discuss all serious options using the same criteria before adding exceptions.
Limit
What this technique cannot guarantee.
Criteria can omit important information. Allow explicit revisions, but record why the criteria changed.
Situations
Where this may be useful.
Review roadmap choices without letting the loudest request, recent event or prior investment define value.
Open →Compare tools using precommitted criteria rather than demos, authority or the first price shown.
Open →Judge performance without letting one recent result or known outcome rewrite the quality of the underlying work.
Open →Compare staying, moving or reskilling without letting salary anchors, sunk time or today's mood decide the future.
Open →Check whether a score is still a useful proxy for the real goal and whether the comparison is being interpreted consistently.
Open →Evidence-linked concepts
Why this check may matter.
Practice this technique
See when the move becomes useful.
A candidate gives a confident opening answer. The panel spends the rest of the interview interpreting mixed evidence as proof that the candidate is strong.
Skill: Evidence evaluationOpen scenario →A previous hire performed very well. The team now treats every feature of that hiring decision as a proven success formula, although several factors were uncertain at the time.
Skill: Evidence evaluationOpen scenario →A vendor presents a fluent AI assistant in a polished demo. The team begins describing the product as reliable and intelligent, although the critical workflow was not tested with company data.
Skill: Evidence evaluationOpen scenario →An employee had one difficult final quarter. The annual review now focuses almost entirely on that period and gives little weight to earlier results.
Skill: MetacognitionOpen scenario →A recruiter names a salary 20% above the current role. The career discussion now revolves around that number, while learning, stability, workload and future options remain vague.
Skill: Decision making under uncertaintyOpen scenario →