This is the heart of portfolio management. Scoring makes items comparable; decision points formalize progress. In corporate practices, this structure is established through decision points that divide the progress of a portfolio item into stages, and a review mechanism that convenes at these points.
Typical decision gate flow
K1
Idea Approval
Is the idea worth a concept study? Low threshold, quick decision.
K2
Concept Approval
Are the technical feasibility and rough work case studies sufficient?
K3
Development Approval
This is the crucial investment decision. Budget and capacity are tied here.
K4
Verification
Do the prototype, test, and certification results meet the target?
K5
Launch Approval
Are production, supply, sales, and service ready?
K6
Post-Launch
Do the results confirm the workplace case?
Scope
Scoring model definition: Criteria, weights, and scoring scales. Different models should be definable for different product types; a software module and a machine cannot be evaluated using the same criteria.
Evaluation questionnaires: The score is generated using standardized questions rather than personal opinion; this allows for tracking how the score is formed.
Automatic score generation: A portion of the score is automatically calculated from actual data in the system (sales history, number of service calls, margin).
Decision point and situation management: Recording, justification, and approval workflow for "continue/wait/redirect/stop" decisions at each gate.
Comparative review: Items are evaluated side-by-side on the same screen, rather than individually. Portfolio decisions only make sense through comparison.
Versioning: Freezing the data on which the decision was based; preventing later "we didn't know that" arguments.
The hardest decision: stopping.
In corporate life, stopping a project is much harder than starting it. The sunk cost fallacy manifests itself in the phrase, "we've spent this much, let's finish it." However, the correct question is not the amount spent, but the alternative return on investment for completing the project .
The decision gates remove the personal dimension from this challenge: the decision to halt projects is not made by an individual, but by a board based on predefined criteria. In a healthy portfolio, a certain percentage of projects are halted each year; if none are halted, it means the gates are not working properly.
Benefit to the customer
Resources don't get locked away in failed ventures.
The decision-making process will be transparent, reasoned, and subject to oversight.
Teams know in advance which criteria they will be evaluated according to.
Management meetings are dedicated to decision-making, not data preparation.