Trade-offs and Values
What this domain tests
Most real decisions involve multiple objectives that conflict. Candidates must understand trade-offs, dominance (an option at least as good on every objective and better on one), Pareto efficiency, weights (relative importance of objectives), and swing weighting (weighting by the range of difference an objective can make, not by its raw importance).
Know even swaps: if you can find a change that leaves you indifferent, you can eliminate one objective and simplify the comparison. Know that weights are statements of value, not facts, and should be elicited from the decision-maker, not assumed by the analyst.
Traps in questions
- Dominance missed: an option that is better on every dimension should be chosen without weighting.
- Double counting: counting the same benefit under two objectives.
- Weight by importance rather than by swing: a highly important objective with nearly identical scores across options should get little weight.
- Hidden value judgments: an analyst's weights presented as objective.
Worked example
Two suppliers. Supplier X scores 8 on quality and 5 on price; Supplier Y scores 6 on quality and 9 on price. Neither dominates. If quality ranges from 5 to 8 (a swing of 3) and price from 5 to 9 (a swing of 4), weight each by its swing. If the decision-maker says quality matters twice as much per point, X wins on quality by 2 points times 2, equals 4, while Y wins on price by 4 points times 1, equals 4 - a tie, which flags that the decision hinges on a small value judgment worth surfacing.
Rule of thumb
Check for dominance first. If none, use even swaps to eliminate objectives one at a time until the choice is obvious.