Comparison · C61
Defend a marketing budget in committee
Which argumentation method makes the budget trade-off most defensible?
Direct answer
The comparison sets historical rollover, benchmark, point ROI and option portfolio against evidence, sensitivity, capacity and reversibility.
01Choose an argument proportionate to uncertainty and available alternatives.
02The rule, the evidence and the next review date stay visible.
How to use this
Move from the question to the deliverable.
Which argumentation method makes the budget trade-off most defensible?
Choose an argument proportionate to uncertainty and available alternatives.
Critical comparison of arguments
Critical comparison · SQ-61
Compare four ways of defending an envelope
A defensible budget exposes the alternatives, the uncertainty and the execution capacity instead of presenting a single return figure.
Methodological comparison for an annual €1.2m request submitted to an executive committee.
- 01Name
State the decisions requested and the options that are genuinely comparable.
- 02Score
Rate each case on evidence, sensitivity, capacity and reversibility.
- 03Combine
Use each method for its strengths without adding up redundant evidence.
- 04Condition
Tie budget tranches to future evidence and thresholds.
History, benchmark, ROI or option portfolio
Scores run from 1 to 5. A high robustness score means the method makes uncertainty more visible.
| Method | Traceability | Sensitivity | Capacity | Reversibility | Main risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Historical rollover | 3/5 | 1/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | Reproducing inertia |
| External benchmark | 2/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 | 3/5 | Non-comparable scopes |
| Point ROI | 4/5 | 1/5 | 2/5 | 2/5 | False causal precision |
| Option portfolio | 5/5 | 5/5 | 5/5 | 5/5 | More demanding to steer |
01The option portfolio is selected: €780k committed, €270k conditional and €150k in reserve.
02ROI is still presented as a range, never as a point promise.
03The benchmark serves as a plausibility check, not as a basis for calculation.
A critical comparison, not a universal ranking. The choice depends on evidence maturity and on the cost of revision.
Coherence controls
Minimum conditions before validation.
The status, the evidence and the owner must be available for review.
The status, the evidence and the owner must be available for review.
The status, the evidence and the owner must be available for review.
The status, the evidence and the owner must be available for review.
Usable deliverable
Critical comparison of arguments
Explore the decision further with an interactive control, or start from a structured template to produce your deliverable.