3. How do I act?
Case briefing video coming soon
Apply The Human Side
Read the full narration
You have now built the tools in The Human Side. The next task is to apply them to the supplied fictional case. Start with the objective and constraints. Record your first decision and the evidence supporting it. Work the numbers using consistent definitions and units. Invite the strongest reasonable challenge. When new information arrives, keep your first record and explain what changes. Finish with a conditional conclusion: what you would do, why, what remains uncertain and what evidence would trigger a review. This is a teaching exercise with fictional information. The quality of your reasoning matters more than whether a simulated outcome later looks favourable.
Review the human side.
Attempt these four groups of five questions before opening feedback. Aim for 16/20, revisit misunderstood ideas and retry. This website practice gives immediate explanatory feedback. The written case assesses your reasoning rather than a prescribed investment stance or personality.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
DailyCup · the decision-process review
Write a dated decision journal before revealing the outcome cards. Then add a 250–350 word process review after the supplied outcomes. Keep original reasoning unchanged and add a separate revision.
- Record objective, proposed action, evidence, alternative, uncertainty and contrary case.
- Set two observable review conditions and describe a proportionate response.
- Assess Analyst A and B on their documented process before using their outcomes.
- Explain one avoidable weakness, one genuinely new fact and one specific improvement without diagnosing personalities.
Original classroom rubric · 15 marks
- Evidence and calculations (4 marks): Uses relevant sources, accurate arithmetic and explicit assumptions.
- Analysis and alternatives (4 marks): Explains causal mechanisms and treats the strongest contrary case fairly.
- Judgement and revision (4 marks): Weights the evidence, gives a conditional action and explains changes or retained views.
- Communication and process (3 marks): Clear dated record, priority unknowns and useful review conditions; no hindsight rewriting.
Indicative response after your own attempt
A verified and conditional process can produce a loss; a rumour-led process can profit from a favourable surprise. The review should retain both outcomes as evidence without making either the sole verdict. A useful improvement might reconcile realised prices before modelling and preserve independent committee views. Review triggers need defined populations, periods, sources and actions. The journal should distinguish what was reasonably knowable from later information and should not claim that a checklist or a single score establishes future investing skill.
This is an On Judgement practice rubric, not an official AQA mark scheme.
My Investing Judgement
Use your fictional cases, private reflections and dated journal to prepare a 400–600 word review organised under the three questions. This is a record of observed choices and a plan to improve, not a personality test.
1. What do I know?
Where did familiarity or a first number make me feel I knew more than I could support? What did I notice only after slowing down?
Give a specific example from your original and revised work, a strength or limitation you noticed, and one practical safeguard. State what remains uncertain.
2. What influences me?
Whose confidence affected mine? Which feeling or belief influenced the evidence I sought, and what safeguard helped?
Give a specific example from your original and revised work, a strength or limitation you noticed, and one practical safeguard. State what remains uncertain.
3. How do I act?
Did I expand the options, respect the constraints and follow through? What did the outcome teach without rewriting what I knew then?
Give a specific example from your original and revised work, a strength or limitation you noticed, and one practical safeguard. State what remains uncertain.
My next decision
Choose two safeguards. For each, name the trigger, action, review date and evidence that would show whether it helped. Assess the reasoning and follow-through rather than the pupil’s risk preference, confidence level or willingness to disclose personal information.
Example of an evidence-based reflection
In the first valuation exercise I moved my estimate toward the founder’s number before checking the inputs. Rebuilding it from cash assumptions showed the source of the difference. Next time I will record an independent estimate before viewing a target and retain both versions. One exercise does not establish a permanent trait; I will check whether this safeguard helps across several different cases.
Foundation: Sir Andrew Likierman’s Judgement at Work: Making Better Choices. His six elements are knowledge and experience, awareness, trust, feelings and beliefs, choice and delivery. Our three areas group those elements for investing students; this is an On Judgement teaching adaptation, not Likierman’s published grouping or an endorsed programme.
Likierman · six elements explained by London Business School
Public LBS explanation checked on 1 November 2026. Six elements are attributed to Sir Andrew Likierman; the three-area grouping and investing exercises are On Judgement adaptations, not his published model or an endorsement.
Andrew Likierman · Judgement at Work: Making Better Choices
Publisher book page. The full book has not been reviewed; teaching uses the publicly explained six-element framework with original examples.
What comes next
Continue to Futures: Careers and Pitches, drawing on the investing foundations, skills and judgement you have built.