Claridec Benchmark Assessment

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this important assessment! Your participation will be a beacon, guiding others in understanding the landscape of contemporary decision-making.

Assessment Purpose:

The assessment is aimed at reassessing the maturity of decision-making in the post-COVID era. As decision makers navigate this 'new normal,' understanding these changes is more crucial than ever.

Your Privacy is Our Priority:

No email addresses or personal data will be collected unless you optionally provide it at the end, ensuring your core responses remain anonymous.

Release of Findings:

The insights gained from the aggregated assessment results will be accessible in a report on our website.

About the Assessment Questions

It should take about 7-10 minutes to complete the assessment. There are three parts to the survey:

The first part is a few demographic queries to contextualize your responses.
The second part is the benchmarking where you will rate the maturity of 10 dimensions of your organization's decision-making practices on a scale of 1-10. In addition to the numerical rating, we ask that you share the rationale for your rating in a few words. We've also provided further guidance that clarifies the maturity scale by providing a description of Levels 1, 5, and 10 for each decision-making dimension to be rated (visible when the slider is near these values).
In the final part of the survey, you have the option to share your views on both the biggest barriers and opportunities for enhancing decision making.

INSTRUCTIONS

Answer all of the 10 survey questions based on your experience with a single organization. In selecting the single organization, choose the one that you're most familiar with over the past three years.
Only consider important major decisions that involved an irrevocable allocation of significant resources.
Be honest and thoughtful in your answers.

Demographics

Help us contextualize your responses.

What industry do you work in?*

How many employees work at your organization?*

What is your organization's approximate annual revenue?*

What is your current level of seniority within the organization?*

What level of annual budget responsibility do you have?*

What role do you typically play in your organization's decision-making process?*

What continent are you located in?*

Which decision discipline dominates my current professional responsibilities?*

Benchmark Questions

Rate the maturity (1-10) and provide rationale for each dimension.

Note that helpful guidance is provided when the dot is moved to 1, 5, or 10.

QUESTION 1: Framing

Framing

Framing is about setting the right context and boundaries for decision-making. At a minimum, it involves articulating the problem or opportunity at hand, understanding the key issues and stakeholder perspectives, and considering various alternatives. A well-defined frame is crucial for guiding the decision process and ensuring that all relevant aspects are considered.

Rating:

Immediate pursuit of a preferred solutionDiverse perspectives shape frame

Level 5: When faced with a major or complex decision, we may have discussions with individual colleagues and management that may provide some insights but lack a structured approach to comprehensively and collaboratively exploring all relevant alternatives and perspectives.

Rationale for your rating of Framing*

QUESTION 2: Quantifying Uncertainty

Quantifying Uncertainty

Quantifying uncertainty turns unknowns into ranges, scenarios, or probability distributions so options can be compared on expected value and downside. Scope: analysis quality (distributions, scenarios, calibration, value of information). Out of scope: managing risk (risk ownership, mitigations, or monitoring).

Rating:

Deterministic judgment onlyEmbedded probabilistic analysis

Level 5: Key variables have ranges or scenarios; tornado charts or simple Monte Carlo used on major cases; some calibration exercises; EV and downside are shown but not tracked post-decision.

Rationale for your rating of Quantifying Uncertainty*

QUESTION 3: Deliberating Decisions

Deliberating Decisions

Deliberating decisions is the discipline of the decision conversation—decision rights, checkpoints, pre-reads, decision briefs, dissent handling, and recorded rationale. Scope: how the decision is discussed and decided. Out of scope: collaborating internally (cross-functionally) or externally.

Rating:

Ad hoc decision conversationsDisciplined checkpoints and decision briefs

Level 5: Major decisions use a light template (problem, options, criteria, risks); decision rights are usually clear; pre-reads circulate; dissent is invited but not structured.

Rationale for your rating of Deliberating Decisions*

QUESTION 4: Collaborating Externally

Collaborating Externally

Engaging external stakeholders brings outside perspectives (customers, partners, regulators, communities) into the analysis and choice. Scope: who outside the organization is engaged, when, and how input is integrated. Out of scope: collaborating internally or deliberating during decision process.

Rating:

After-the-fact outreachEarly, ongoing external input

Level 5: External stakeholders are identified and consulted on major decisions; timing varies; integration into analysis is inconsistent.

Rationale for your rating of Collaborating Externally*

QUESTION 5: De-biasing

De-biasing

Bias awareness in decision making acknowledges that cognitive biases, i.e., thinking shortcuts that are hard wired in the human brain, can skew judgment and lead to suboptimal decisions. Recognizing and actively working to mitigate these biases through structured processes and engaging diverse perspectives is key to making more objective and balanced decisions.

Rating:

Biases not acknowledgedBiases systematically addressed

Level 5: We recognize cognitive biases and have basic measures like peer reviews to counter them, but these efforts are not comprehensive or consistently applied across decisions.

Rationale for your rating of De-biasing*

QUESTION 6: Collaborating Internally

Collaborating Internally

Internal collaboration is cross-functional working outside the formal decision meeting—joint analysis, shared models, common taxonomies, and routine co-creation across silos. Scope: how functions work together between checkpoints. Out of scope: collaborating externally or deliberating during decision process.

Rating:

Isolated functionsCross-functional working practices

Level 5: Cross-functional working sessions occur on major decisions; shared definitions exist; some shared models but adoption is uneven.

Rationale for your rating of Collaborating Internally*

QUESTION 7: Governing Decisions

Governing Decisions

Decision governance refers to the framework and processes that define how decisions are made within an organization. This includes establishing clear roles, responsibilities, and accountability for decision-makers, and tailoring decision processes to the particular decision context to ensuring that decisions are made efficiently and effectively.

Rating:

No decision accountabilityRobust governance framework

Level 5: We have a governance structure based on project investment levels, which provides some clarity, but it may not fully account for the complexity and cross-functional nature of decisions.

Rationale for your rating of Governing Decisions*

QUESTION 8: Conducting Lookbacks

Conducting Lookbacks

Lookbacks are post-decision reviews that compare expected vs. actual outcomes, identify causes, and close actions. Scope: event-based learning tied to a specific decision. Out of scope: incorporating lessons learned (enterprise training, playbooks, or communities of practice).

Rating:

No post-decision reviewsRoutine reviews with tracked actions

Level 5: Reviews happen for major decisions within 60-90 days; a standard template compares expected vs. actual; actions are assigned but follow-through is inconsistent.

Rationale for your rating of Conducting Lookbacks*

QUESTION 9: Managing Risk

Managing Risk

Risk management is treatment and monitoring—identification, ownership, mitigations, contingencies, triggers, and KRIs—so risks are managed proactively. Scope: governance of risk response and monitoring. Out of scope: quantifying uncertainty (probabilistic modeling of uncertainty).

Rating:

Reactive issue handlingRisk treatment with monitoring

Level 5: A risk register exists for major initiatives with owners and mitigations; qualitative ratings are used; periodic reviews occur; some contingency plans exist but trigger discipline is weak.

Rationale for your rating of Managing Risk*

QUESTION 10: Incorporating Lessons Learned

Incorporating Lessons Learned

Incorporating lessons learned is the institutional system that improves future decisions—curricula, playbooks, knowledge bases, calibration practice, and communities of practice. Scope: ongoing capability development across the portfolio. Out of scope: conducting lookbacks (one-off post-decision reviews).

Rating:

Ad hoc trainingInstitutional learning system

Level 5: A core playbook exists; periodic training is offered; a searchable lessons repository exists but is lightly used; calibration exercises occur sporadically.

Rationale for your rating of Incorporating Lessons Learned*

Additional Reflective Questions

Which organizational decisions consistently take longer than they should, and why?

From a risk management perspective, what's the most frustrating aspect of how major decisions get made in your organization?

What manual processes in organizational decision-making do you wish could be automated using AI?

Where do you see the greatest potential for cost savings through improved organizational decision-making?

General Reflections

Email (Optional)

Interested in receiving a copy of the report with your scores benchmarked against others? If so, then please share your email.