farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
At first, the answer seems obvious: no.
But consider this.
A building project is delivered on time and within budget. To reduce upfront costs, the team eliminates some energy-efficiency measures, selects lower-cost systems, and postpones investments in long-term resilience.
At handover, everyone is satisfied.
According to traditional project metrics, the project is a success.
Yet a few years later, the building faces higher operating costs, expensive upgrades, lower adaptability, and growing pressure to meet new sustainability requirements.
So what exactly was successful?
The outcome?
Or the decisions that produced it?
Perhaps one of the limitations of our project success frameworks is that they measure results more rigorously than they measure decision quality.
A project can sometimes achieve good outcomes despite poor decisions.
Likewise, good decisions made under uncertainty may not always lead to good outcomes.
This raises an interesting question:
Should project success be evaluated only by outcomes, or should decision quality become part of the conversation?
I'd love to hear your experience:
▪ Have you ever seen a project that looked successful at delivery but created problems later?
▪ Have you ever made a decision that was unpopular at the time but proved valuable years later?
▪ How do you evaluate decision quality in your projects?
Luis BrancoCEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, LdªCarcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal
An excellent question.
One of the greatest risks in project management is judging decisions solely by their outcomes.
A good outcome can make a poor decision look wise, just as a bad outcome can make a sound decision appear flawed.
The real test of decision quality is whether the decision was based on appropriate information, sound assumptions, clear trade-offs and responsible judgment at the time it was made.
Organizations are generally very good at measuring results. They are often far less effective at examining the rationale behind the decisions that produced those results.
Perhaps the next evolution in project success is not only evaluating what was delivered, but also how and why the key decisions were made.
...
1 reply by farshid adavi
Jun 24, 2026 5:41 AM
farshid adavi
...
Thank you, Luis. I particularly appreciate your distinction between evaluating outcomes and evaluating the reasoning behind decisions. Your point about organizations being far better at measuring results than examining the assumptions, trade-offs, and judgment that shaped them is especially thought-provoking. Perhaps one of the challenges for modern project governance is creating mechanisms that assess not only what was achieved, but also the quality of the decision-making process that led there. In the long run, that may be where resilience, adaptability, and sustainable value are truly built.
Success is in the eye of the beholder which is why perception of key stakeholders often trumps quantitative measures such as variance against constraints.
And as all decisions on projects are made under some level of uncertainty, I would agree that the decision-making process quality is more important than the actual outcome of decisions, although one would expect that the decision makers learn from poor outcomes to improve over time.
Kiron
...
1 reply by farshid adavi
Jun 23, 2026 9:43 AM
farshid adavi
...
Thank you for this thoughtful perspective. I particularly agree that stakeholder perception often shapes project success as much as, if not more than, traditional performance metrics. At the same time, your point about uncertainty is critical. When outcomes are heavily influenced by factors beyond our control, evaluating the quality of the decision-making process becomes increasingly important. Perhaps one of the real indicators of project maturity is not whether every decision leads to a positive outcome, but whether organizations systematically learn from outcomes—good or bad—and continuously improve the way decisions are made.
Saving Changes...
farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
An additional challenge is that project success is often influenced by stakeholder perception as much as by objective performance measures. A project that exceeds its original constraints may still be viewed as successful if it creates value for its stakeholders, while a project delivered exactly as planned may be perceived differently if it fails to meet evolving needs and expectations.
This reinforces the importance of evaluating the quality of the decision-making process itself. Since project decisions are always made under conditions of uncertainty, outcomes alone may not provide a reliable assessment of decision quality. Equally important is an organization's ability to learn from outcomes—both positive and negative—and continuously improve the governance mechanisms, assumptions, and trade-offs that shape future decisions.
Saving Changes...
farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
Jun 23, 2026 7:14 AM
Replying to Kiron Bondale
...
Farshid -
Success is in the eye of the beholder which is why perception of key stakeholders often trumps quantitative measures such as variance against constraints.
And as all decisions on projects are made under some level of uncertainty, I would agree that the decision-making process quality is more important than the actual outcome of decisions, although one would expect that the decision makers learn from poor outcomes to improve over time.
Kiron
Thank you for this thoughtful perspective. I particularly agree that stakeholder perception often shapes project success as much as, if not more than, traditional performance metrics. At the same time, your point about uncertainty is critical. When outcomes are heavily influenced by factors beyond our control, evaluating the quality of the decision-making process becomes increasingly important. Perhaps one of the real indicators of project maturity is not whether every decision leads to a positive outcome, but whether organizations systematically learn from outcomes—good or bad—and continuously improve the way decisions are made. Saving Changes...
Yes—a project can succeed despite bad decisions, but it’s usually by coincidence, compensation, or context—not because the decisions were actually good. Skilled team members fix issues Problems get corrected during execution
...
1 reply by farshid adavi
Jun 24, 2026 5:43 AM
farshid adavi
...
Thank you, Sreesudha. I think this is a very important distinction. Projects sometimes succeed not because the original decisions were sound, but because capable teams recognize issues early, adapt, and compensate for them during execution. In that sense, a successful outcome may reflect the resilience and problem-solving ability of the project team as much as the quality of the initial decisions. Perhaps one of the challenges is distinguishing between success created by good decisions and success achieved through effective recovery from poor ones.
This is my third attempt to respond. My last two attempts ended up longer than the original post, so we'll see how this goes.
Decision quality should only be part of the project evaluation conversation if:
- it's part of the decision to run a project in the first place - it's part of the decision to run a project to its conclusion - measures are established that actually identify decision quality - it's going to be part of the decision re: continuing to use the product post-launch - risk is considered throughout the product lifecycle
I include risk because, if the decision is impactful/critical, you should be considering things like probability, impact, and how to respond if things don't go according to plan. It's not just about risk - focusing solely on risk would be a bad decision - but attention to risk shouldn't be left out of the process.
...
1 reply by farshid adavi
Jun 24, 2026 5:47 AM
farshid adavi
...
Thank you, Aaron. I appreciate the practical perspective. Your point about measurement is particularly important. If decision quality is to become part of project evaluation, we need ways to assess it consistently rather than treating it as an abstract concept. I also agree that risk cannot be separated from decision quality. Decisions are made under uncertainty, and part of what decides robust is not only the expected outcome, but also how well risks, assumptions, and potential responses have been considered throughout the lifecycle. Perhaps the next challenge is moving from whether decision quality matters to how we can evaluate it in a meaningful and practical way.
Saving Changes...
farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
Jun 23, 2026 3:46 AM
Replying to Luis Branco
...
An excellent question.
One of the greatest risks in project management is judging decisions solely by their outcomes.
A good outcome can make a poor decision look wise, just as a bad outcome can make a sound decision appear flawed.
The real test of decision quality is whether the decision was based on appropriate information, sound assumptions, clear trade-offs and responsible judgment at the time it was made.
Organizations are generally very good at measuring results. They are often far less effective at examining the rationale behind the decisions that produced those results.
Perhaps the next evolution in project success is not only evaluating what was delivered, but also how and why the key decisions were made.
Thank you, Luis. I particularly appreciate your distinction between evaluating outcomes and evaluating the reasoning behind decisions. Your point about organizations being far better at measuring results than examining the assumptions, trade-offs, and judgment that shaped them is especially thought-provoking. Perhaps one of the challenges for modern project governance is creating mechanisms that assess not only what was achieved, but also the quality of the decision-making process that led there. In the long run, that may be where resilience, adaptability, and sustainable value are truly built. Saving Changes...
farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
Jun 23, 2026 11:50 AM
Replying to Sreesudha Ayyalasomayajula
...
Yes—a project can succeed despite bad decisions, but it’s usually by coincidence, compensation, or context—not because the decisions were actually good. Skilled team members fix issues Problems get corrected during execution
Thank you, Sreesudha. I think this is a very important distinction. Projects sometimes succeed not because the original decisions were sound, but because capable teams recognize issues early, adapt, and compensate for them during execution. In that sense, a successful outcome may reflect the resilience and problem-solving ability of the project team as much as the quality of the initial decisions. Perhaps one of the challenges is distinguishing between success created by good decisions and success achieved through effective recovery from poor ones. Saving Changes...
farshid adaviProject Manager and Strategic Planner| CivilHouse
Jun 24, 2026 12:03 AM
Replying to Aaron Porter
...
This is my third attempt to respond. My last two attempts ended up longer than the original post, so we'll see how this goes.
Decision quality should only be part of the project evaluation conversation if:
- it's part of the decision to run a project in the first place - it's part of the decision to run a project to its conclusion - measures are established that actually identify decision quality - it's going to be part of the decision re: continuing to use the product post-launch - risk is considered throughout the product lifecycle
I include risk because, if the decision is impactful/critical, you should be considering things like probability, impact, and how to respond if things don't go according to plan. It's not just about risk - focusing solely on risk would be a bad decision - but attention to risk shouldn't be left out of the process.
Thank you, Aaron. I appreciate the practical perspective. Your point about measurement is particularly important. If decision quality is to become part of project evaluation, we need ways to assess it consistently rather than treating it as an abstract concept. I also agree that risk cannot be separated from decision quality. Decisions are made under uncertainty, and part of what decides robust is not only the expected outcome, but also how well risks, assumptions, and potential responses have been considered throughout the lifecycle. Perhaps the next challenge is moving from whether decision quality matters to how we can evaluate it in a meaningful and practical way.
...
1 reply by Aaron Porter
Jun 24, 2026 10:25 AM
Aaron Porter
...
"Perhaps the next challenge is moving from whether decision quality matters to how we can evaluate it in a meaningful and practical way."
That could be tough. How much information is enough information to make a good decision? How long should it take? Who determines how much information is enough and how much uncertainty is acceptable? How do you measure the uncertainty? If you measure quality of the decision based on the outcomes of the decision, how do you quantify the level of luck that was involved? If you can define the levels of uncertainty and luck involved, can you repeat it in the future with the same results?
I'll just say that I'm glad it's not my job to figure that out.
Thank you, Aaron. I appreciate the practical perspective. Your point about measurement is particularly important. If decision quality is to become part of project evaluation, we need ways to assess it consistently rather than treating it as an abstract concept. I also agree that risk cannot be separated from decision quality. Decisions are made under uncertainty, and part of what decides robust is not only the expected outcome, but also how well risks, assumptions, and potential responses have been considered throughout the lifecycle. Perhaps the next challenge is moving from whether decision quality matters to how we can evaluate it in a meaningful and practical way.
"Perhaps the next challenge is moving from whether decision quality matters to how we can evaluate it in a meaningful and practical way."
That could be tough. How much information is enough information to make a good decision? How long should it take? Who determines how much information is enough and how much uncertainty is acceptable? How do you measure the uncertainty? If you measure quality of the decision based on the outcomes of the decision, how do you quantify the level of luck that was involved? If you can define the levels of uncertainty and luck involved, can you repeat it in the future with the same results?
I'll just say that I'm glad it's not my job to figure that out.
...
1 reply by farshid adavi
Jun 25, 2026 2:50 AM
farshid adavi
...
Thank you again, Aaron. I really appreciate you taking the discussion a step further. I don't think the goal is to eliminate uncertainty or create a perfect formula for decision quality—that's probably impossible. Rather, it may be about asking whether, given the information, constraints, and uncertainty that existed at the time, the decision followed a transparent, evidence-informed, and well-governed process. Perhaps decision quality is less about predicting the future perfectly and more about demonstrating that the decision was made responsibly, with explicit assumptions, clear trade-offs, and conscious consideration of risk. Outcomes will always contain an element of luck, but the quality of the reasoning behind a decision is something organizations can learn from and continuously improve.
Community Champion
