Imagine this scenario during a meeting: Someone expresses concern about whether new projects X and Y rollout dates should be before or after the organization's internal evaluation. Someone suggested that it should be before the internal audit and gave a reason to support why. Another person proposed a set of possible dates, and soon a negotiation of which dates and venues would be most suitable followed, with the assumption that the projects' release dates would be before the evaluation. There was no discussion over how good the reason is for the decision. No challenges were raised about the cons of the decision. No member explored alternatives. No deliberation or critical discussion over the decision took place.

How could a decision-making strategy have helped put more rigor into their decisions? What role might an ethical decision-making framework play?