Choosing without knowing everything
How can you make a reasoned choice when information is missing, without waiting for unattainable certainty?
1250 € per session, excl. VAT
In short
This half-day session of 3 hours raises awareness of decisions made with incomplete information. Through role plays and a fictional case study, participants identify their biases, compare scenarios, make their criteria explicit and distinguish reversible commitments from choices that are difficult to correct.
Why this training?
When information arrives in dribs and drabs, two reflexes can dominate: postponing the choice indefinitely or clinging to the first plausible option. Identifying what is genuinely missing helps distinguish an essential check from an impossible search for certainty. A reasonable decision is not judged solely by its outcome. Making assumptions, criteria and opportunities to reverse course visible helps explain the trade-off, welcome an objection and reconsider the choice when the situation changes. Running case study: The fictional organisation ‘Rivage Cartonnages’ must accept, split or refuse an urgent order. The availability of a material remains uncertain and another delivery has already been promised. Participants take on the roles of the sales, production and customer relations managers; new information arrives between two exchanges. Transfer to the workplace: When next making a routine trade-off, use the quick-reference sheet to distinguish facts from assumptions, state your criteria and set a review point. Then ask a colleague whether the reasons for the choice were understandable, regardless of the outcome achieved.
Objectives of this training
- Distinguish the available facts, assumptions and unknowns.
- Identify confirmation, anchoring or conformity bias.
- Compare three options against explicit criteria.
- Describe the reversibility of a choice and its limits.
- Formulate a provisional decision with a condition for review.
Who is it for and what are the prerequisites?
Roles and tasks concerned
- Employees facing competing priorities or incomplete requests.
- Managers and team leaders who need to explain trade-offs.
- Support functions involved in collective decisions.
Prior skills
- No technical or methodological prerequisites.
- Be able to discuss a simple workplace trade-off without sharing confidential information.
What you will work on
Separate what you know from what you assume
Objective: Name the uncertainty before proposing a solution. Facts, assumptions, unknowns; information useful to the choice; the cost of waiting and the scope of responsibility.
Resist shortcuts and welcome challenges
Objective: Recognise reflexes that close down discussion prematurely. Anchoring on the first proposal, seeking confirmation and aligning with the majority view.
Compare options without predicting the future
Objective: Justify a choice using shared criteria. Criteria relating to deadlines, customer commitments and workload; favourable, intermediate and unfavourable scenarios, without invented probabilities.
Commit and plan for review
Objective: Adjust caution to the consequences of the choice. Reversible or difficult-to-reverse decisions; limits of a trial; alert threshold, deadline and recourse to the appropriate authority.
What you take away
- Completed facts, assumptions and unknowns grid.
- Comparison table of options and scenarios.
- Decision sheet with limits on reversibility and a review point.
- Quick-reference sheet of questions to ask before making a trade-off.
Method and assessment
- Short inputs followed by immediate practice using the running case study.
- Individual work followed by work in pairs, with participants reviewing each other’s work.
- Guided group discussion: what works, what needs correcting and what remains a human decision.
- Preparation: Identify a recent decision made without having all the information; anonymise it if shared. Prepare paper materials; any other resources used must be authorised by the organisation.
Observable criteria: Missing information is distinguished from suppositions. ; A conflicting objection is rephrased before being discussed. ; Three options are compared against the same criteria. ; Reversibility is justified by concrete consequences. ; The announced decision includes an observable condition for review..
Frequently asked questions
Do I need to have line management responsibility?
No. The exercises also cover routine trade-offs between colleagues.
Do we work on real situations?
The main case study is fictional. Personal examples must be anonymised and contain no sensitive data.
Do we learn to decide faster at any cost?
No. You learn to distinguish what can be tried from what requires prior checking or approval.
How is learning observed?
Through the grids produced, the wording used in role plays and peer feedback against explicit criteria.
Last updated: