# Chain Estimation → Decision → Storytelling Template ## Workflow Copy this checklist and track your progress: ``` Analysis Progress: - [ ] Step 1: Gather inputs and define decision scope - [ ] Step 2: Estimate costs, benefits, and probabilities - [ ] Step 3: Calculate expected value and compare alternatives - [ ] Step 4: Structure narrative with clear recommendation - [ ] Step 5: Validate completeness with quality checklist ``` **Step 1: Gather inputs and define decision scope** Clarify what decision needs to be made, identify 2-5 alternatives to compare, list key uncertainties (costs, benefits, probabilities), determine audience (executives, technical team, finance), and note constraints (budget, timeline, requirements). Use [Quick Template](#quick-template) structure below. **Step 2: Estimate costs, benefits, and probabilities** For each alternative, quantify all relevant costs (development, operation, opportunity cost), estimate benefits (revenue, savings, productivity gains), assign probabilities to scenarios (best/base/worst case), and use ranges rather than point estimates. See [Estimation Guidelines](#estimation-guidelines) for techniques. **Step 3: Calculate expected value and compare alternatives** Compute probability-weighted outcomes for each alternative, compare using appropriate decision criteria (NPV, IRR, payback, utility), identify which option has best risk-adjusted return, and test sensitivity to key assumptions. See [Decision Analysis](#decision-analysis) section. **Step 4: Structure narrative with clear recommendation** Follow storytelling framework: problem statement, alternatives considered, analysis summary, clear recommendation with reasoning, and next steps. Tailor level of detail to audience. See [Narrative Structure](#narrative-structure) for guidance. **Step 5: Validate completeness with quality checklist** Use [Quality Checklist](#quality-checklist) to verify: all alternatives considered, estimates are justified, probabilities are reasonable, expected value is calculated correctly, sensitivity analysis performed, narrative is clear and persuasive, assumptions stated explicitly. ## Quick Template Copy this structure to create your analysis: ```markdown # Decision: {Decision Question} ## 1. Decision Context **What we're deciding:** {Clear statement of the choice} **Why this matters:** {Business impact, urgency, strategic importance} **Alternatives:** 1. {Option A} 2. {Option B} 3. {Option C} **Key uncertainties:** - {Variable 1}: {Range or distribution} - {Variable 2}: {Range or distribution} - {Variable 3}: {Range or distribution} **Constraints:** - Budget: {Available resources} - Timeline: {Decision deadline, implementation timeline} - Requirements: {Must-haves, non-negotiables} **Audience:** {Who needs to approve this decision?} --- ## 2. Estimation ### Alternative 1: {Name} **Costs:** - Initial investment: ${Low}k - ${High}k (most likely: ${Base}k) - Annual operational: ${Low}k - ${High}k per year - Opportunity cost: {What we give up} **Benefits:** - Revenue impact: +${Low}k - ${High}k (most likely: ${Base}k) - Cost savings: ${Low}k - ${High}k per year - Strategic value: {Qualitative benefits} **Probabilities:** - Best case (30%): {Scenario description} - Base case (50%): {Scenario description} - Worst case (20%): {Scenario description} **Key assumptions:** - {Assumption 1} - {Assumption 2} - {Assumption 3} ### Alternative 2: {Name} {Same structure} ### Alternative 3: {Name} {Same structure} --- ## 3. Decision Analysis ### Expected Value Calculation **Alternative 1: {Name}** - Best case (30%): ${Amount} × 0.30 = ${Weighted} - Base case (50%): ${Amount} × 0.50 = ${Weighted} - Worst case (20%): ${Amount} × 0.20 = ${Weighted} - **Expected value: ${Total}** **Alternative 2: {Name}** {Same calculation} **Expected value: ${Total}** **Alternative 3: {Name}** {Same calculation} **Expected value: ${Total}** ### Comparison | Alternative | Expected Value | Risk Profile | Time to Value | Strategic Fit | |-------------|----------------|--------------|---------------|---------------| | {Alt 1} | ${EV} | {High/Med/Low} | {Timeline} | {Score/10} | | {Alt 2} | ${EV} | {High/Med/Low} | {Timeline} | {Score/10} | | {Alt 3} | ${EV} | {High/Med/Low} | {Timeline} | {Score/10} | ### Sensitivity Analysis **What if {key variable} changes?** - If {variable} is 20% higher: {Impact on decision} - If {variable} is 20% lower: {Impact on decision} **Most sensitive to:** - {Variable 1}: {Explanation of impact} - {Variable 2}: {Explanation of impact} **Robustness check:** - Conclusion holds if {conditions} - Would change if {conditions} --- ## 4. Recommendation **Recommended option: {Alternative X}** **Reasoning:** {1-2 paragraphs explaining why this is the best choice given the analysis} **Key factors:** - {Factor 1}: {Why it matters} - {Factor 2}: {Why it matters} - {Factor 3}: {Why it matters} **Tradeoffs accepted:** - We're accepting {downside} in exchange for {upside} - We're prioritizing {value 1} over {value 2} **Risks and mitigations:** - **Risk**: {What could go wrong} - **Mitigation**: {How we'll address it} - **Risk**: {What could go wrong} - **Mitigation**: {How we'll address it} --- ## 5. Next Steps **If approved:** 1. {Immediate action 1} - {Owner} by {Date} 2. {Immediate action 2} - {Owner} by {Date} 3. {Immediate action 3} - {Owner} by {Date} **Success metrics:** - {Metric 1}: Target {value} by {date} - {Metric 2}: Target {value} by {date} - {Metric 3}: Target {value} by {date} **Decision review:** - Revisit this decision in {timeframe} to validate assumptions - Key indicators to monitor: {metrics to track} **What would change our mind:** - If {condition}, we should reconsider - If {condition}, we should accelerate - If {condition}, we should pause ``` --- ## Estimation Guidelines ### Cost Estimation **Categories to consider:** - **One-time costs**: Development, implementation, migration, training - **Recurring costs**: Subscription fees, maintenance, support, infrastructure - **Hidden costs**: Opportunity cost, technical debt, switching costs - **Risk costs**: Probability-weighted downside scenarios **Estimation techniques:** - **Analogous**: Similar past projects (adjust for differences) - **Parametric**: Cost per unit × quantity (e.g., $150k per engineer × 2 engineers) - **Bottom-up**: Estimate components and sum - **Three-point**: Best case, most likely, worst case → calculate expected value **Expressing uncertainty:** - Use ranges: $200k-$400k (not $300k) - Assign probabilities: 60% likely $300k, 20% $200k, 20% $400k - Show confidence: "High confidence" vs "Rough estimate" ### Benefit Estimation **Categories to consider:** - **Revenue impact**: New revenue, increased conversion, higher retention - **Cost savings**: Reduced operational costs, avoided hiring, infrastructure savings - **Productivity gains**: Time saved × value of time - **Risk reduction**: Probability of bad outcome × cost of bad outcome - **Strategic value**: Market positioning, competitive advantage, optionality **Quantification approaches:** - **Direct measurement**: Historical data, benchmarks, experiments - **Proxy metrics**: Leading indicators that correlate with value - **Scenario modeling**: Best/base/worst case with probabilities - **Comparable analysis**: Similar initiatives at comparable companies ### Probability Assignment **How to assign probabilities:** - **Base rates**: Start with historical frequency (e.g., 70% of projects finish on time) - **Adjustments**: Modify for specific circumstances (this project is simpler/more complex) - **Expert judgment**: Multiple estimates, average or calibrated - **Reference class forecasting**: Look at similar situations **Common probability pitfalls:** - **Overconfidence**: Ranges too narrow, probabilities too extreme (5% or 95%) - **Anchoring**: First number becomes reference even if wrong - **Optimism bias**: Best case feels more likely than it is - **Planning fallacy**: Underestimating time and cost **Calibration check:** - If you say 70% confident, are you right 70% of the time? - Test with past predictions if available - Use wider ranges for higher uncertainty --- ## Decision Analysis ### Expected Value Calculation **Formula:** ``` Expected Value = Σ (Outcome × Probability) ``` **Example:** - Best case: $500k × 30% = $150k - Base case: $300k × 50% = $150k - Worst case: $100k × 20% = $20k - Expected value = $150k + $150k + $20k = $320k **Multi-year NPV:** ``` NPV = Σ (Cash Flow_t / (1 + discount_rate)^t) ``` **When to use:** - **Expected value**: When outcomes are roughly linear with value (money, time) - **Decision trees**: When sequence of choices matters - **Monte Carlo**: When multiple uncertainties interact - **Scoring/weighting**: When mix of quantitative and qualitative factors ### Comparison Methods **1. Expected Value Ranking** - Calculate EV for each alternative - Rank by highest expected value - **Best for**: Decisions with quantifiable outcomes **2. NPV Comparison** - Discount future cash flows to present value - Compare NPV across alternatives - **Best for**: Multi-year investments **3. Payback Period** - Time to recover initial investment - Consider in addition to NPV (not instead of) - **Best for**: When liquidity or fast ROI matters **4. Weighted Scoring** - Score each alternative on multiple criteria (1-10) - Multiply by importance weight - Sum weighted scores - **Best for**: Mix of quantitative and qualitative factors ### Sensitivity Analysis **One-way sensitivity:** - Vary one input at a time (e.g., cost ±20%) - Check if conclusion changes - Identify which inputs matter most **Tornado diagram:** - Show impact of each variable on outcome - Order by magnitude of impact - Focus on top 2-3 drivers **Scenario analysis:** - Define coherent scenarios (pessimistic, base, optimistic) - Calculate outcome for each complete scenario - Assign probabilities to scenarios **Break-even analysis:** - At what value of {key variable} does decision change? - Provides threshold for monitoring --- ## Narrative Structure ### Executive Summary (for executives) **Format:** 1. **The decision** (1 sentence): What we're choosing between 2. **The recommendation** (1 sentence): What we should do 3. **The reasoning** (2-3 bullets): Key factors driving recommendation 4. **The ask** (1 sentence): What approval or resources needed 5. **The timeline** (1 sentence): When this happens **Length:** 4-6 sentences, fits in one paragraph **Example:** > "We evaluated building custom analytics vs. buying a SaaS tool. Recommendation: Buy the SaaS solution. Key factors: (1) $130k lower expected cost due to build risk, (2) 6 months faster time-to-value, (3) proven reliability vs. custom development uncertainty. Requesting $20k implementation budget and $120k annual subscription approval. Implementation begins next month with value delivery in 8 weeks." ### Detailed Analysis (for stakeholders) **Structure:** 1. **Problem statement**: Why this decision matters (1 paragraph) 2. **Alternatives considered**: Show you did the work (bullets) 3. **Analysis approach**: Methodology and assumptions (1 paragraph) 4. **Key findings**: Numbers, comparison, sensitivity (1-2 paragraphs) 5. **Recommendation**: Clear choice with reasoning (1-2 paragraphs) 6. **Risks and mitigations**: What could go wrong (bullets) 7. **Next steps**: Implementation plan (bullets) **Length:** 1-2 pages **Tone:** Professional, balanced, transparent about tradeoffs ### Technical Deep-Dive (for technical teams) **Additional detail:** - Estimation methodology and data sources - Sensitivity analysis details - Technical assumptions and constraints - Implementation considerations - Alternative approaches considered and why rejected **Length:** 2-4 pages **Tone:** Analytical, rigorous, shows technical depth --- ## Quality Checklist Before finalizing, verify: **Estimation quality:** - [ ] All relevant costs included (one-time, recurring, opportunity, risk) - [ ] All relevant benefits quantified or described - [ ] Uncertainty expressed with ranges or probabilities - [ ] Assumptions stated explicitly with justification - [ ] Sources cited for estimates where applicable **Decision analysis quality:** - [ ] Expected value calculated correctly (probability × outcome) - [ ] All alternatives compared fairly - [ ] Sensitivity analysis performed on key variables - [ ] Robustness tested (does conclusion hold across reasonable ranges?) - [ ] Dominant option identified with clear rationale **Narrative quality:** - [ ] Clear recommendation stated upfront - [ ] Problem statement explains why decision matters - [ ] Alternatives shown (proves due diligence) - [ ] Analysis summary appropriate for audience - [ ] Tradeoffs acknowledged honestly - [ ] Risks and mitigations addressed - [ ] Next steps are actionable **Communication quality:** - [ ] Tailored to audience (exec vs technical vs finance) - [ ] Jargon explained or avoided - [ ] Key numbers highlighted - [ ] Visual aids used where helpful (tables, charts) - [ ] Length appropriate (not too long or too short) **Integrity checks:** - [ ] No cherry-picking of favorable data - [ ] Downside scenarios included, not just upside - [ ] Probabilities are calibrated (not overconfident) - [ ] "What would change my mind" conditions stated - [ ] Limitations and uncertainties acknowledged --- ## Common Decision Types ### Build vs Buy - **Estimate**: Dev cost, maintenance, SaaS fees, implementation - **Decision**: 3-5 year TCO with risk adjustment - **Story**: Control vs. cost, speed vs. customization ### Market Entry - **Estimate**: TAM/SAM/SOM, CAC, LTV, time to profitability - **Decision**: NPV with market uncertainty scenarios - **Story**: Growth opportunity vs. execution risk ### Hiring - **Estimate**: Comp, recruiting, ramp time, productivity impact - **Decision**: Cost per output vs. alternatives - **Story**: Capacity constraints vs. efficiency gains ### Technology Migration - **Estimate**: Migration cost, operational savings, risk reduction - **Decision**: Multi-year TCO plus risk-adjusted benefits - **Story**: Short-term pain for long-term gain ### Resource Allocation - **Estimate**: Cost per initiative, expected impact - **Decision**: Portfolio optimization or impact/effort ranking - **Story**: Given constraints, maximize expected value