I used to ask my friends about shooting at a deer and what they took into consideration. I have been hunting deer for the past 55 years and have taken a few really nice deer. Hey, if we don't shoot and eat them, they are going to die in the woods and rot. Did you ever measure anything with a precision micrometer? No matter how good you are at measuring, you never get it exactly right. My point is that nothing in this world is "Exact". There is always some error. Now if you accept the notion that no mater what you do, there is always some error, the questions follows as to how to deal with this error. It is always there and we need to take it into consideration. Now back to the deer. I am a good shot and have a very accurate rifle, but I am always a little bit off on every shot. You could kid yourself, but we all know that no one is a "perfect" shot. This leads us back to the original question of how we deal with this error that is always there. In the case of the deer, the best place to hit the deer is right in the heart. Hit him there and it is all over. The problem is that you know that you will be a little bit off, so what direction is the best to be off? If you shot too low, it will kick up dust and scare the deer off and you will not get a second shot. If you catch the deer low, he will run far away and die some place where you will never be able to find him. If you shoot high, you mighty catch him in the spine and he will go down and you can then finish him off. If you shoot too high, it will be a total miss and the deer will most likely not know where the shot came from and you may get a second shot. See how this whole thing works. When you error, there is a "best" way to error. In the case of the deer, "shoot high". Now how about some other cases?
Take something that is also real simple. We hear a lot about improving our school system my making class sized smaller. I think that we would all agree that the smaller the class size, given that all other conditions were unchanged, our kids would get a better education. The problem is exactly what size class is the one that gives us the best value for out kids? If we had one teacher per kid, it might be good for the kid, but we will not be able to afford it. If, on the other hand, we had 100 kids per teacher, the cost would be very low, but the education of our kids would, also be low. The real question is, "where do we get the best value for our dollar in education with respect to class size"? Do you agree with that? Most people would. I don't have a graph here, but if you accept that somewhere between 1 and 100 is the optimum class size in terms of "value", where is the optimum? If you make these calculations, you will find that the curve will show that the optimum value is somewhere between 15 and 25 with the optimum at 20. I just made this up, but the point is that when you look at the numbers and the "value" index for a class size of 15, 20 and 25 the "value" number is about the same. This is because the optimum area on the curve is very "flat". In theroy, the optimum point is exactly "flat". It has a slope of "Zero". High school math!! Now what does this mean?
Here is the punch line. Almost every decision situation is one that tries to find the "optimum" point or the "best" decision. In the case of the class size, we want the "optimum" or "best" class size because at this point we will get the best value for our tax dollar. Isn't that what it is all about? Now let's go back to the deer example. Which of the class sizes should I recommend and why? You have to come up with your own answer, but here is mine. I would go for 25 and here is why? If I went for 15 and it turned out to be wrong, I would be stuck with extra teachers who I would have a hard time getting rid of. The value for 15 would be the same as for 25, so why not go for 25. If I turned out to be wrong, I could always hire some more teachers, but not the other way around. Starting to see how this works?
In all decision situations, you have to investigate the "value" function and see which side is the "best" to error on. I could come up with a thousand example, but I think you are getting the idea. You will never have exact information when making a decision, no matter how hard you might try. Good luck.
