Be the first to complete today's dilemma.
Schrödinger's cat purrsYou're on a committee that must choose which of several good projects gets a single grant. The proposals are strong but very different - one serves the neediest, one promises the most measurable impact, one has the best track record.
Choosing by need might not maximize impact. Choosing by impact might overlook the most vulnerable. Choosing by merit might favour the already strong.
Whatever criterion you use, someone loses out. The question is which value you're willing to prioritize when you can't do everything.
Do you choose primarily by need, by potential impact, or by merit?