Decisions Under Uncertainty: Make the Trade-Offs Visible

Human Performance weekly series: lesson 35 of 52.

A 5–10 minute crew discussion, plus time to verify the actual controls. The crew talk and Word version are public. Separate supervisor and attendance records are included with free Safety & Systems membership.

Why this matters

A decision becomes difficult when information is incomplete and time is short. Making uncertainty visible helps responsible people compare options without hiding their limits. Aim for a defensible choice within required safety boundaries, with clear reasons to reconsider it.

Learning objective

Compare options, record missing information and identify the authority and conditions governing a consequential decision.

Key hazards or failure points

First option accepted too quickly; contradictory evidence ignored; production pressure; uncertain authority; one benefit hiding another exposure; no trigger to reconsider a choice.

Practical controls

• State the decision and intended outcome before choosing an option. Identify applicable safety requirements and limits. Include waiting for information or maintaining the safe condition where relevant; do not frame exposure as the only way to keep progress.
• Compare credible options with affected workers and the appropriate technical roles. Record evidence, assumptions and consequences for each, including later work. Seek information that could disprove the preferred choice rather than collecting agreement only.
• Name the decision authority, implementation owner and required checks. Record the selected option’s basis, restrictions and reconsideration triggers. Cost or schedule preferences cannot waive a required protection or technical acceptance criterion.

Verify It in the Field

• Use a safe planning scenario. Ask two people to state the decision being made and the information still missing. Compare their answers with the decision record; correct a different understanding before anyone relies on the choice.
• Trace one important reason for the preferred option to its current source and scope. Have the required reviewer examine contrary evidence. Record the actual finding, person and time; confidence is not a substitute for the prescribed assessment.
• Follow the chosen option into the work instructions and control checks. Ask the receiving crew what change would make it stop and seek review. Mark future checks pending until completed and hold dependent exposure when required evidence remains unresolved.

Stop and reassess

Pause the dependent decision or work for an unknown required limit, contradictory findings, missing authority or a change outside the documented basis. Maintain the task’s defined safe condition. Obtain authorized reassessment, complete required checks and communicate the outcome before proceeding.

Crew discussion questions

• What choice are we actually making?
• What evidence could change our preferred option?
• What condition requires this decision to be reconsidered?

For each required control, record its acceptance source and criterion, safe verification method, responsible checker, actual result and time. Use VERIFIED, HOLD/NOT VERIFIED, or N/A with a reason. A tick alone is not evidence. Complete all applicable task inspections; do not enter danger or improvise a test to fill out a form.

Leader preparation and practical detail

Make a reversible planning choice without experimenting on people

Illustrative situation: a replacement component is unavailable. Options might include rescheduling or obtaining a technically approved alternative. A trial installation is not a safe way to establish unknown compatibility. The required authority evaluates the technical basis while dependent work remains protected. The discussion makes alternatives visible; it does not supply engineering approval.

Record what the choice depends on

The DOE decision-making excerpt supports deliberate comparison, contingencies and review. Use a concise record of the information available, important uncertainty and reason for the authorized choice. Do not treat a numerical score, group vote or the label conservative as proof that a requirement is met. Where an essential limit is unknown, retain the hold until the required basis exists.

Reconsider without concealing the earlier basis

A sound decision can need revision when new information arrives. Record what changed and which control or assumption it affects, then obtain the required reassessment. Keep the earlier decision traceable rather than editing its history to appear certain. The Project Review lesson addresses release interfaces; this lesson practices comparing options and making uncertainty visible.

Short supervisor field check

• Decision and safety boundaries stated.
• Credible options and consequences considered.
• Unknowns and contrary evidence recorded.
• Authority and implementation checks assigned.
• Restrictions and review triggers communicated.

Confirm the relevant trained/authorized people, unresolved items, interim protection, correction owner and recheck. Record required release authority and rebrief anyone affected. The separate sheet supports these records; it does not replace a specialist inspection, permit or engineering determination.

Attendance and follow-through

Use the separate attendance sheet for participants, roles, discussion concerns, actions and late-arrival rebriefs. Attendance is not proof of competence, functioning controls or authorization to work. Keep completed records private under employer procedures.

Source acknowledgment

This resource draws on the U.S. Department of Energy’s DOE-HDBK-1028-2009, Human Performance Improvement Handbook, Volume 2 (June 2009). Todd Jerome Jenkins makes no claim of authorship or copyright ownership in the original U.S. Government work. New explanations, examples, exercises and layouts are Todd Jerome Jenkins adaptations. No endorsement by DOE or the U.S. Government is implied. Third-party material credited in the handbook remains attributed to its source; this notice does not claim rights in that material.

Source excerpt: Volume 2/VOLUME 2 DECISION MAKING.pdf; Printed pp. 63, 64, 65. The June 2009 handbook supplies concepts; this lesson uses original explanations and exercises.

Technical scope and references

References reviewed October 9, 2026. DOE human-performance tools and OSHA recommended practices support preparation and discussion; they do not establish universal technical acceptance criteria. Apply the current task procedure, manufacturer instructions, permit and required competent or qualified decisions. A successful exercise does not replace required training, technical verification or work authorization.

1. DOE-HDBK-1028-2009, Volume 2 — Decision making — June 2009 illustrative guidance; Printed pp. 63, 64, 65. Original ZIP excerpt inspected in full; no claim of universal mandated process.
2. OSHA — Hazard Prevention and Control — Recommended practices, action items 3 and 6: implementation responsibility and effectiveness checks; not technical acceptance criteria.

Connect this discussion to your JHA/JSA

Use the JHA/JSA planning and field-verification worksheet to record the actual task steps, hazards, responsible roles and controls. No task-specific worked example is linked for this topic yet. Return to What Changed Today? when the plan or conditions change.

Related Todd Jerome Jenkins articles: How to Conduct a Job Safety Analysis and What Is Human and Organizational Performance?.

Related crew discussions

• Assumptions: Show What Is Known and What Is Not
• Problem Solving: Test the Explanation Before the Fix

Continue the weekly series

• Lesson 34: Project Review: Resolve Interfaces Before Release
• Lesson 36: Problem Solving: Test the Explanation Before the Fix

Put one check into practice

Use the free JHA/JSA planning and field-verification worksheet to record today’s change, the required protection and the evidence needed before exposure.