In this paper, we analyze approaches to assess the effectiveness of decision analyses. We develop an effectiveness framework, categorized in metrics to assess the quality of the decision process (“process effectiveness”), the quality of the model results (“output effectiveness”), and the quality of the long-term consequences of the analysis (“outcome effectiveness”). With a focus on the first two dimensions, “process” and “output,” we introduce two new approaches to assess the effectiveness of decision analyses applied in organizations. First, a new process effectiveness approach serves to compare the effectiveness of decision analyses to existing decision processes. Second, we assess output effectiveness with a before/after preference measurement design, which aids to capture the alignment of group members quantitatively when using decision analysis. We used six case studies, implemented during an applied research project, to test the two measures.

No abstract

At the end of high school, teenagers must deal with the first life‐changing decision of determining what to do after graduation. For these decisions, adolescents need to be able to make good choices. However, most schools have not yet implemented decision trainings into their curricula. A new intervention called “KLUGentscheiden!” was developed to train complex decision‐making in high school students to close this gap. The intervention targets three key components of good decision‐making: envisioning one's objectives, identifying relevant alternatives, and comparing the identified alternatives by a weighted evaluation. We assumed that successfully training those decision‐analytical steps should enhance self‐perceived proactive decision‐making skills. In addition, the training should also enhance self‐assessed career choice self‐efficacy. The intervention was evaluated in a pseudorandomized control study including 193 high school students. Compared to a control group, the intervention group significantly increased proactive decision‐making skills and career choice self‐efficacy. Although different long‐term evaluations are still pending, the KLUGentscheiden! intervention provides an important tool to train complex decision‐making in high‐school students. It also has the potential to apply to other career choices of young individuals, such as choosing majors, a final thesis, a job, or a field of work.

At the end of high school, teenagers have to deal with their first life-changing decisions when deciding what to do after having graduated from school. For these decisions, adolescents need to be able to make good decisions. However, most schools have not implemented decision trainings into their curricula yet. A new intervention called "KLUGentscheiden!" was developed to train complex decision-making in high school students to close this gap. The intervention targets three key components of good decision making: envisioning one's objectives, identifying relevant alternatives, and comparing the identified alternatives by a weighted evaluation.We assumed that successfully training those decision-analytical steps should enhance self-perceived proactive decision-making skills. In addition, the training should also enhance self-assessed career choice self-efficacy. The intervention was evaluated in a pseudorandomized control study including 193 high school students. Compared to a control group, the intervention group significantly increased proactive decision-making skills and career-choice self-efficacy. Although different long-term evaluations are still pending, the KLUGentscheiden! intervention could provide an important tool to train complex decision-making in high-school students. In its essentials, it could also be applied to other career choices of young individuals, such as choosing majors, a final thesis, a job, or a field of work.