Stage 4: Strategy | Decision Making

Life design produces decisions and lots of them. Some are small: which experiment to try first, which value to prioritise this month, which morning routine to test for a week. Others carry real weight: whether to leave a career, move countries, end a relationship, start something from scratch.

Most people handle big decisions one of two ways. They go with their gut and hope for the best. Or they agonise for weeks, read 40 articles, ask 12 friends, and then pick whatever option reduces their anxiety fastest. Both approaches have blind spots. Gut feeling ignores information you already have, whereas endless deliberation disguises fear as thoroughness.

The frameworks in this document sit between those two extremes. They give you a structured way to think through decisions without replacing your intuition. Think of them as lenses. Each one shows you a different angle on the same choice. You don't need all 5 for every decision - sometimes one is enough. Sometimes stacking 2 or 3 gives you the clarity you couldn't find on your own.

None of these are original to this course. They come from business strategy, military planning, cognitive psychology, and behavioural economics. Each one has been tested in real decisions by real people, and each one counters a specific cognitive bias that trips humans up when the stakes are personal.

The five frameworks

Access your Notion workbook here.

The 10/10/10 Rule

Suzy Welch, 10-10-10: A Life-Transforming Idea (2009)

When you're stuck on a decision, ask yourself three questions:

• How will I feel about this 10 minutes from now?

• 10 months from now?

• 10 years from now?

The power here is in the separation. Your 10-minute answer captures your emotional reaction: the fear, the excitement, the relief, and the dread. That reaction is, of course, real, but it's also temporary. Your 10-month answer forces you to think past the initial disruption and into the adjustment period. And your 10-year answer pulls you toward what actually matters.

Welch developed this framework while juggling a demanding career and four children. She found that most of her worst decisions came from optimising for the 10-minute feeling (avoiding discomfort) at the expense of the 10-year outcome. The reverse was also true: her best decisions often felt terrible in the first 10 minutes.

The framework works because it forces temporal distance. Daniel Kahneman's research on affective forecasting shows that people consistently overweight their current emotional state when predicting future feelings. The 10/10/10 structure builds a correction for that bias directly into the process.

Your 10/10/10 analysis

Pick a decision you're currently facing and map it as below:

Your decision:

• 10 minutes from now: How will you feel right after choosing this? What emotions come up?

• 10 months from now: What will your daily life look like? What will have changed? What will you have adjusted to?

• 10 years from now: Will this decision still matter? What will you wish I had chosen?

Look at the pattern across all three rows. Where does your answer shift?

One-way vs two-way doors

Jeff Bezos, 2015 Amazon shareholder letter.

Bezos splits all decisions into two types. One-way doors are irreversible - once you walk through, you can't come back. Think things like selling a house you love, having a child, leaving your country permanently, etc. These deserve slow, careful thinking.

Two-way doors are reversible. You can try them, see what happens, and walk back through if they don't work. For example, trying a new job for a year, testing a side project, moving to a new city with a return ticket in your back pocket. These deserve speed. Try it, learn, adjust.

The problem Bezos identified (in the context of Amazon's operations, but it applies everywhere) is that most people treat two-way doors like one-way doors. They deliberate endlessly over decisions they could simply test. They agonise over a career change they could reverse in 6 months, or a creative project they could abandon after a weekend. The cost of that over-deliberation is enormous: months or years spent thinking instead of doing.

For life design, this distinction is very useful. Recognising that a decision is reversible gives you permission to move.

Classify your pending decisions exercise

List 5 decisions you're currently sitting on. For each one, decide: is it a one-way door or a two-way door? Be honest about which ones you're over-thinking.

Count how many are two-way doors. If the number is higher than you expected, ask yourself what you're really afraid of.

The premortem

Gary Klein, "Performing a Project Premortem," Harvard Business Review (2007); Sources of Power (1998)

A postmortem asks what went wrong after something fails. A premortem asks what could go wrong before you commit. The difference is timing, and timing changes everything.

Klein, a cognitive psychologist who spent decades studying how experts make decisions under pressure, found that teams who ran premortems caught problems that standard risk analysis missed entirely. This is because when you ask people "what could go wrong?" they give you polite, cautious answers. When you ask them "imagine it's 6 months from now and this decision was a disaster, tell me why," they suddenly get specific, honest, and creative.

The shift from "what might fail" to "what did fail" (in your imagination) changes your relationship with the scenario. You stop defending the decision and start investigating it and overconfidence bias drops. You notice the risks you were quietly ignoring because you wanted the outcome to work.

Klein found that premortems reduced overconfidence by roughly 30% in organisational settings. For personal decisions, the effect is similar. You're not trying to talk yourself out of the choice. You're trying to see it clearly before you're emotionally committed.

Run a premortem on your decision

Pick a decision you're leaning toward. Now imagine it's 6 months later and it went badly. Write the story of what happened.

• The decision you're leaning toward:

• It's 6 months later. Things went wrong. Here's what happened:
  Write the failure story in as much detail as you can. What did you miss? What surprised you?

• Looking at that story, which causes were preventable?

• What could you do now (before deciding) to reduce those risks?

The Eisenhower matrix

Named after Dwight D. Eisenhower; popularised by Stephen Covey in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (1989)

Eisenhower reportedly said: "What is important is seldom urgent, and what is urgent is seldom important." Covey turned this into the 2x2 grid that most people have seen at some point. But most people have only seen it applied to task management, not for life design.

The urgency axis captures external pressure, such as deadlines, social expectations, other people's timelines, the buzzing anxiety of something that feels like it needs to happen now. The importance axis captures internal alignment. Does this connect to your values? Does it move you toward your vision? Will it matter in 5 years?

The trap most people fall into is spending all their energy on urgent-but-unimportant tasks (email, social obligations, busywork that feels productive) while the important-but-not-urgent work (building a new skill, having a difficult conversation, starting the thing you actually care about) sits in a pile labelled "someday."

In a life design context, the matrix helps you see which of your current decisions and commitments are actually yours and which ones belong to someone else's timeline.

Sort your current decisions

Place your current decisions, tasks, and commitments into the grid:

• Important & Urgent (do these first)

• Important & Not urgent (schedule)

• Not Important & Urgent (delegate or reduce)

• Not Important & Not Urgent (eliminate)

Look at where most of your items landed. If the "important, not urgent" is nearly empty, that's what holds your life design work and is the one that keeps getting postponed.

The WRAP process

Chip Heath & Dan Heath, Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work (2013)

The Heath brothers reviewed 4 decades of decision science research and identified 4 cognitive biases that sabotage decisions. Then they built a framework where each step counters one of those biases.

W: Widen your options. Counters narrow framing. When you think you have 2 options ("should I stay or leave?"), you almost certainly have more. The Heaths found that decisions framed as "whether or not" (a single option, yes or no) failed 52% of the time. Decisions with at least 2 genuine alternatives failed only 32% of the time. Widening is the simplest and most effective fix.

R: Reality-test your assumptions. Counters confirmation bias. Once you're leaning toward an option, you'll unconsciously seek information that confirms it. The fix: actively look for disconfirming evidence. Talk to someone who made a similar choice and regretted it. Ask "what would have to be true for this to be a terrible decision?"

A: Attain distance before deciding. Counters short-term emotion. Your feelings in the moment are real, but they're also temporary. The 10/10/10 rule fits here. So does the advice to sleep on it, or to ask: "What would I tell my best friend to do?" Distance lets your long-term self weigh in.

P: Prepare to be wrong. Counters overconfidence. Set a tripwire: a specific future signal that would tell you the decision isn't working. "If I'm still miserable after 3 months, I'll revisit." "If the project hasn't generated any revenue by September, I'll stop." Tripwires prevent you from staying committed to a failing course out of stubbornness or sunk-cost thinking.

Exercise: WRAP one of your decisions

Pick the biggest decision you're currently facing and walk it through all 4 steps.

Your decision:

W: Widen: What options haven't you considered? What would you do if your current top choice vanished?

R: Reality-test: What evidence contradicts your leaning? Who has made this choice and regretted it?

A: Attain distance: What would you tell your best friend to do? How will you feel about this in 10 years?

P: Prepare to be wrong: What's your tripwire? What specific signal will tell you this isn't working?

Your decision-making style

Before you apply any framework, it helps to know your defaults. Everyone has patterns: some people decide too fast and deal with the consequences later, whereas others research endlessly and never commit. Some hand the decision to whoever has the strongest opinion in the room and some avoid deciding altogether and wait until circumstances decide for them.

None of these are unfixable, because each one of them can work in certain situations. The question is whether your default pattern is serving you or running you.

Exercise: name your patterns

For each tendency below, reflect honestly on when it helps and when it costs you.

• I decide too fast

• I overthink and delay

• I let others decide for me

• I avoid deciding entirely

Then ask yourself:

Which of these is your strongest pattern?

When did this pattern last cost you something real?

The decision you're facing right now

Pick one real decision you're currently sitting on, something with actual stakes. Then run it through at least 2 of the 5 frameworks above. Write in full sentences, not bullet points. The goal is to think deeply here, not to fill in a form.

• The decision:

• Why it matters to you:

• Framework 1 (name it):

• What this framework revealed:

• Framework 2 (name it):

• What this framework revealed:

• After running both frameworks, what do you notice?

• Did they point in the same direction? Different directions? Did anything surprise you?

• What are you going to do?

Reflection

• Think about the best decision you've ever made. How did you make it? Did you use a framework, go with your gut, or do something else entirely?

• Think about a decision you regret. Which of these 5 frameworks, applied beforehand, might have changed the outcome?

• Which framework in this document felt most natural to you? Which one felt most uncomfortable? The uncomfortable one is probably the one you need most.

• Where in your life are you treating a two-way door like a one-way door right now?

• What decision have you been avoiding? Write it down. Just the act of naming it changes your relationship with it.

• If you ran a premortem on your current life direction (not a single decision, but the whole trajectory), what failure story would you write?

AI companion (optional)

How to use: Use this when you're stuck on a specific decision and want a thinking partner. Share the decision honestly, including the parts you're anxious about. The AI works best when you give it real details, not a sanitised version.

Copy and paste the prompt below into Claude, ChatGPT, or any AI assistant:

I'm facing a personal decision and I'd like your help thinking it through.
Here's the decision: [describe your decision in 2-3 sentences].
I've been working through some decision-making frameworks (10/10/10, one-way vs two-way doors, premortem, Eisenhower matrix, WRAP).
Help me apply the ones that fit best. Ask me clarifying questions before jumping to advice. Push back if my thinking has blind spots. I don't want reassurance. I want to see the decision more clearly.