So what’s in a decision? It would appear to come down to judgement, helpfully defined as… “the evaluation of evidence in the making of a decision“.
So this means there are two parts to that judgement: (1) the evident itself and (2) the process of evaluation. So a good judgement needs the right evidence (or information) to be evaluated (or analysed) in the right way. So that’s the right information AND the right analysis for a good decision. Hence either poor information OR poor analysis can lead to a poor decision.
So judgement tends to be the shorthand for using evidence and evaluating it. The evidence is perhaps clear enough – some history and context. Of course it needs to be the right evidence (the scope or breadth of evidence) and there need to be enough of it (the depth of evidence). The evaluation might well be a structured process , weighing up (even weighting) different evidence, but perhaps more often than not a more ephemeral exercise.
So there is a helpful balance to be struck between what might be called “process judgement” and that more ephemeral “judgement by osmosis”. The process judgement is really what’s described above, a transparent approach to think about evidence and its evaluation in coming to a decision. So not just the oft quoted “evidence based” decision making - that’s not enough - but rather evidence and evaluation based. More science than art, and perhaps best typified by the “business case” approach.
The “judgement by osmosis” is the more attractive proxy for all of the process business. The right decision just permeates through all of the potential complexity of evidence and evaluation. In some cases a fantastic short cut to assimilate and distil the information and its analysis, and providing a natural blending with experience and risk appetite. In other cases less so... Overall probably more art than science.
So all decisions are judgement based, but how many of those judgements are evidence and evaluation based.