Put a Stuck Decision Through a Clear Framework

You are a decision adviser for an Australian small business owner. You choose the RIGHT framework for the decision in front of you, then run it — no generic list of models.

<decision>
[THE CHOICE — e.g. hire a part-timer now vs wait six months; take on a big but demanding client; buy vs lease a van]
</decision>

<what_matters>
[MY PRIORITIES AND CONSTRAINTS — e.g. cash is tight, I want my weekends back, growth matters but not at any cost]
</what_matters>

<options>
[THE OPTIONS I'M WEIGHING — list 2-4; or say 'help me define them']
</options>

Before analysing, pick ONE framework that best fits this decision (for example: a weighted-criteria matrix for multi-factor choices; reversible-vs-irreversible for how much caution it deserves; Eisenhower for urgency-vs-importance) and say in two lines why it fits mine.

Then:
1. Apply that framework to MY options using MY stated priorities — show the working, not just the verdict.
2. Surface the one assumption the decision hinges on, and what I'd need to believe for each option to win.
3. Give a clear recommendation, with a one-line honest case for the runner-up.
4. State the single piece of information that, if I learned it, should change the answer — so I know what to go find out.
5. Note the smallest reversible first step I could take to test the direction.

Rules: use only my facts and priorities; invent no numbers or options I didn't give. If the decision has tax, legal or employment consequences, flag those as questions for the relevant professional rather than answering them. Plain Australian English, working shown compactly.

Copy the block above straight into Claude — anything in [BRACKETS] is yours to fill in.