One of the most important characteristics of a decision is the context in which it takes place. Context includes the set of values, preferences, constraints, policies and regulations that will affect both the deciders and those identified as the ultimate beneficiaries.

It would be challenging enough to define context were it static. However, contexts are time-dependent. They are in flux, evolving as conditions and values do. Decision-makers therefore need not only to understand the environment in which the decision is made, but the one that will prevail when the effects of the decision are brought to bear.

Sketching out the context is one of the first tasks of a decision-makers. It can involve many activities: consulting with stakeholders, researching legislation, assessing attitudes, analysing issues, understanding priorities, identifying obligations, vetting policies, defining the decision scope and generally sniffing the wind among many others.

One of the reasons such care needs to be taken is that decisions, ultimately, should be judged relative to the context in which they made. There is no such thing as an absolutely good decision. An action leading to a positive outcome in one context could just as easily lead to a disastrous one in another. A poor considered decision leading to a positive outcome remains a poorly considered decision.

The merit of a decision is therefore different from the merit of its associated outcome. While the former is evaluated in terms of the context in which it was made as well as the degree of predictability attached to its trajectory in becoming a future one, the latter is measured purely against the benefits realised in that future context. This distinction should be before us at all times. Being wrong is no crime. Being untidy in our arguments, undisciplined in our approach, haphazard in our process and ignorant of our context are the principal causes of being poor outcomes. This is where improvements can be made.

So how do we define a context? One way is to make a checklist of items that may be relevant to the central issue driving the decision and that may need to be reflected in our thinking. Many of these may turn out not to have any bearing. However, it is only be exhaustively identifying them that we will know. We have already mentioned a few contextual elements. Here are a further candidates for consideration:

We could also perform a free-association exercise culminating in what is variably called a 'Mind Map' or a 'Creative Pattern'. These record an approximation of a 'stream of consciousness' that reflects the output of the brain. This is a more creative and perhaps less analytical approach toward the problem of identifying a decision context but can be used productively to think laterally and originally.

Since we humans do not have a line to the future we cannot possibly predict with certainty what lies ahead. All we can do is use our knowledge of the past to guide deliberations about the future and make considered judgements which are largely rational, occasionally courageous but are always in good faith. Understanding context is an early pre-requisite toward this aim.