Matrice de décision pondéréeNouveau

Comparez les options selon des critères pondérés et des exigences incontournables, repérez les évaluations manquantes, testez la sensibilité et exportez un journal de décision vérifiable

Cet outil n’est pas entièrement traduit ; certains contenus utilisent la langue source ou une langue de repli.

Checking local recovery and shared data…

Decision question

Define must-have conditions and distinct preferences before rating alternatives. Want scores run from 1 (weaker) to 5 (stronger); zero / blank means unrated, not neutral. Express costs as aligned criteria such as affordability.

Alternatives (2/40)

Option 1

Option 2

Criteria (3/20)

1Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

2Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

3Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

Scores and evidence

Option 1

Criterion 1Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 2Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 3Score evidence / uncertainty

Option 2

Criterion 1Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 2Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 3Score evidence / uncertainty

Human review: trade-offs, risks and tentative conclusionReview date

In alternatives or criteria, Ctrl/⌘+Enter adds and Alt+Delete removes. Scores, evidence, clearing and loading can be undone. CSV contains the scoring matrix; Markdown / JSON retain evidence and review notes.

6 ratings / checks remain. Only fully rated options meeting every Must receive a rank.

Method boundaries and references

Inspiré de la distinction Must / Want (critères obligatoires / souhaitables) de Kepner–Tregoe : vérifier d’abord les exigences, puis pondérer les préférences. Cet outil utilise une échelle de 1 à 5 pour faciliter la discussion ; ce n’est ni une mise en œuvre complète de la méthode d’origine, ni une échelle de mesure validée. Les notations incomplètes ne sont pas classées, et une proportion n’est pas une probabilité de succès. Vérifiez par ailleurs les critères redondants, la qualité des preuves, les exigences non compensables et les risques : la décision finale revient aux personnes.

Kepner-Tregoe — Decision Analysis: Musts and Wants FHWA — Work Zone Road User Costs, Chapter 3

Local storage is not a backup and can be cleared by the browser. JSON restores all fields. Share links are not encrypted; do not include sensitive data.

Chargement de l’outil…

Guide

Matrice de décision pondéréeNouveau

Comparez les options selon des critères pondérés et des exigences incontournables, repérez les évaluations manquantes, testez la sensibilité et exportez un journal de décision vérifiable

Cet outil n’est pas entièrement traduit ; certains contenus utilisent la langue source ou une langue de repli.

Checking local recovery and shared data…

Decision question

Alternatives (2/40)

Option 1

Option 2

Criteria (3/20)

1Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

2Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

3Criterion nameMust have (switching clears this column’s scores and evidence)Weight 1–5

Scores and evidence

Option 1

Criterion 1Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 2Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 3Score evidence / uncertainty

Option 2

Criterion 1Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 2Score evidence / uncertainty

Criterion 3Score evidence / uncertainty

Human review: trade-offs, risks and tentative conclusionReview date

6 ratings / checks remain. Only fully rated options meeting every Must receive a rank.

Method boundaries and references

Kepner-Tregoe — Decision Analysis: Musts and Wants FHWA — Work Zone Road User Costs, Chapter 3

Local storage is not a backup and can be cleared by the browser. JSON restores all fields. Share links are not encrypted; do not include sensitive data.