Decision Second-Guessing

The day after the big game, talking heads on television and radio sports shows take up the task of "Monday morning quarterbacking." They dissect every failed play, explaining what the coach and players should have done and why. Had the team only done this instead of that, they argue, the outcome might well have been different.

The decision recommendations offered up by these talking heads are made from the comfort of an easy chair rather than from a pressure filled sideline. They judge decisions made in the heat of battle, in the midst of uncertain circumstances, and with the clock ticking, through the crystal clear lens of 20-20 hindsight.

During hearings into the Watergate scandal, Senator Howard Baker asked "what did the president know and when did he know it?" While Baker's question was posed to judge the guilt or innocence of President Nixon, the same question might be posed to judge the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a decision maker. For one, judgment should be based on what that individual knew (or reasonably should have known) at the time the decision was made and not based on information that subsequently came to light. For another, judgment should take into account the timing of information becoming available. Digesting information and formulating responses takes time. For that reason, information received in advance is more valuable than information that arrives only moments before a decision must be made.

Choose from among the following alternatives the most important take away from this posting for you:

1. Avoid talking heads engaged in Monday morning quarterbacking at all costs
2. Judge a decision maker's choice based only on information that was available to them at the time they made the decision
3. Gather relevant information well in advance of when that information is needed to make an effective decision
4. None of the above

And yes, completing this multiple choice question constitutes a decision!