Choosing by Advantages (CBA): A Complete Guide

Choosing by Advantages (CBA) is a decision-making method built by Jim Suhr. It compares the real differences between options instead of scoring each option separately. Most decision tools ask, “How good is each option?” CBA asks a different question: “What advantage does one option have over the other, and how much does that advantage matter?”

This small shift fixes a common flaw in scoring methods, where a low-importance factor can wrongly outweigh a high-importance one. CBA works through five defined terms: alternative, factor, criterion, attribute, and advantage. Teams in Lean Construction, Lean Six Sigma, and project management use CBA to make transparent, defensible choices that hold up under later questioning.

Quick-Reference Table: The 5 Core CBA Terms

Term	Definition	Simple Example
Alternative	One of the options being compared	Vendor A, Vendor B
Factor	A category used to compare the alternatives	Cost, delivery time, quality
Attribute	The actual value of a factor for one alternative	Vendor A costs $50,000
Advantage	The difference between two attributes	Vendor B costs $10,000 less than Vendor A
Criterion	The rule used to judge importance	“Cost matters more than color”

Key Takeaways

• CBA compares advantages, not options. It never scores an alternative directly. It only measures the difference between alternatives.
• Weighted scoring has a known flaw. It can let a low-importance factor outweigh a high-importance one, simply because of how the math adds up.
• CBA fixes this by weighting only the advantage itself, not the full attribute score of each option.
• CBA uses five clear terms. Alternative, factor, attribute, advantage, and criterion give every team member the same vocabulary.
• The Tabular Method is the most common CBA tool. It works well for moderately complex decisions with two or more options.
• CBA fits naturally into Lean Six Sigma’s Improve step. Teams often face a choice between several fixes, and CBA gives that choice structure.

What Is Choosing by Advantages?

Choosing by Advantages is a decision-making system, not a single tool. Jim Suhr developed it while working at the U.S. Forest Service. It later became a core method inside Lean Construction and project delivery.

CBA rests on one core idea: decisions should be based on the importance of advantages, not the importance of alternatives. This sounds like a small distinction. In practice, it changes how a team scores every option.

Why Most Scoring Methods Get Decisions Wrong

Most teams compare options with a weighted scoring model. Each factor gets a weight. Each alternative gets a score on that factor. The scores get multiplied by the weights and added up.

This method has a hidden flaw. It lets teams assign importance to a factor before they know if the alternatives even differ on that factor.

Here is a simple example. Two vendors both deliver in 5 days. Delivery time gets a high importance weight anyway, because delivery usually matters. That weight gets applied to both vendors equally, even though there is zero real difference between them on that factor. The importance judgment gets wasted on a factor that offers no actual advantage.

CBA solves this by flipping the order. First, find the actual difference between alternatives. Then, and only then, judge how much that specific difference matters.

Also Read: Diffusion of Innovation: Adopter Categories & Six Sigma Use

The Five CBA Terms, Explained with an Example

CBA depends on shared vocabulary. A team that mixes up these five terms usually ends up with an unsound decision.

Alternative is one of the choices on the table. If a company compares three software vendors, each vendor is an alternative.

Factor is a category used to compare the alternatives, like cost, support quality, or setup time.

Attribute is the actual value of a factor for one specific alternative. Vendor A’s attribute for “setup time” might be 3 weeks.

Advantage is the difference between two attributes. If Vendor B sets up in 1 week and Vendor A takes 3 weeks, the advantage is “2 weeks faster.”

Criterion is the rule the team uses to judge how much an advantage matters. A criterion might say “each week of setup time saved is worth $2,000 in lost productivity avoided.”

The Five Phases of a CBA Decision

A full CBA decision moves through five phases. Skipping a phase usually weakens the final decision.

1. Stage-setting. The team defines the decision, the people involved, and the constraints before comparing anything.
2. Innovation. The team generates real alternatives worth comparing, not just the first two ideas that come up.
3. Decision-making (mentally choosing). The team identifies factors, attributes, and advantages, then judges each advantage against a criterion.
4. Reconsideration (emotionally choosing). The team checks whether the data-backed answer still feels right, and investigates if it does not.
5. Implementation (physically choosing). The team commits to the chosen alternative and puts it into action.

The CBA Tabular Method: Step by Step

The Tabular Method is the most common CBA tool for a moderately complex decision between two or more alternatives that are not equal in cost.

1. List the alternatives across the top of a table.
2. List the factors down the side of the table, one row per factor.
3. Fill in the attribute for each alternative under each factor.
4. Identify the advantage for each factor, meaning the difference between the least-preferred attribute and each other attribute.
5. Assign importance to each advantage using a defined scale, based on a clear criterion.
6. Sum the importance scores for each alternative.
7. Compare total importance of advantages against total cost for each alternative.
8. Select the alternative that gives the most importance of advantage per dollar spent, unless a non-cost factor should override that.

Also Read: Brown Paper Mapping: What It Is and Why It Still Beats Software

A Worked Example: Choosing a New Scheduling Software

A company compares two scheduling tools. Tool A costs $40,000. Tool B costs $55,000.

Factor	Tool A (Attribute)	Tool B (Attribute)	Advantage	Importance of Advantage
Setup time	4 weeks	1 week	Tool B is 3 weeks faster	60 points
Mobile app	No mobile app	Full mobile app	Tool B has mobile access	80 points
Reporting	Basic reports	Basic reports	No advantage	0 points
Support hours	Business hours only	24/7 support	Tool B offers extended support	30 points

Total importance of advantage for Tool B: 170 points, for $15,000 more.

This table shows the CBA logic clearly. Reporting gets zero points, because both tools perform the same on that factor. A weighted scoring model might have still assigned reporting a weight and given both tools a score, wasting attention on a factor with no real difference. CBA only spends judgment where an actual advantage exists.

CBA vs. Other Common Decision Methods

Method	Compares	Main Weakness	Best Fit
Weighted scoring	Each alternative’s full score	Can overweight factors with no real difference	Simple decisions with few factors
Pros and cons list	Informal strengths and weaknesses	No shared scale, hard to defend later	Quick, low-stakes choices
Cost-benefit analysis	Dollar value only	Ignores non-financial advantages	Purely financial decisions
Choosing by Advantages	Real differences between alternatives	Takes longer to set up correctly	Moderately to highly complex decisions with mixed factors

Where CBA Fits Inside Lean Six Sigma

CBA was built inside the Lean Construction world, but it fits naturally into a Lean Six Sigma DMAIC project, especially during the Improve step.

A Green Belt or Black Belt often faces several possible fixes for a root cause. Should the team automate a step, add a checklist, or redesign the process entirely? CBA gives that choice a transparent, documented structure, instead of letting the loudest voice in the room decide.

CBA also supports project prioritization decisions, like choosing which of several candidate projects a team should tackle first. The same five terms and the same tabular structure apply.

Common Mistakes When Applying CBA

Skipping the stage-setting phase. A team that jumps straight to comparing alternatives often argues in circles, because no one agreed on the actual decision being made.

Confusing attribute with advantage. An attribute is just a fact about one alternative. An advantage only exists when you compare it against another alternative’s attribute.

Assigning importance before finding the real difference. This recreates the exact flaw CBA was built to fix. Importance judgments should only apply to actual advantages, not to factors in general.

Ignoring the reconsideration phase. A team that skips this step sometimes commits to a data-backed answer that still feels wrong for a reason the data missed, like a stakeholder relationship or a timing constraint.

When CBA Is Overkill

CBA takes more setup time than a quick pros-and-cons list. A low-stakes, reversible decision usually does not need the full Tabular Method. Save CBA for decisions that are expensive to reverse, involve several stakeholders, or need to be defended later to leadership or an auditor.

Frequently Asked Questions on Choosing by Advantages

What does Choosing by Advantages mean?
Choosing by Advantages is a decision-making system that compares the real differences, called advantages, between two or more options, instead of scoring each option separately on its own.

Who created the Choosing by Advantages method?
Jim Suhr developed CBA while working at the U.S. Forest Service. The method later became widely used in Lean Construction and integrated project delivery.

What is the difference between an attribute and an advantage in CBA?
An attribute is a fact about one alternative, like its cost or setup time. An advantage is the difference between two attributes when comparing two alternatives on the same factor.

Why is CBA considered better than weighted scoring?
Weighted scoring can let a factor with no real difference between alternatives still receive an importance weight, which can distort the final decision. CBA only assigns importance to factors where an actual advantage exists.

What is the CBA Tabular Method?
The Tabular Method is a step-by-step CBA process for comparing two or more alternatives of different cost. It lists factors, attributes, and advantages in a table, then compares the total importance of advantages against cost.

Can Choosing by Advantages be used outside construction?
Yes. While CBA started in Lean Construction, its logic applies to any moderately complex decision, including vendor selection, hiring, and choosing between process improvement options in a Lean Six Sigma project.

How is CBA used in a Lean Six Sigma project?
CBA often supports the Improve step of DMAIC, when a team must choose between several possible fixes for a root cause. It gives the team a transparent, documented way to compare those options.

Final Words

Choosing by Advantages fixes a quiet flaw in how most teams compare options: judging importance before confirming an actual difference exists. By defining five clear terms and forcing a team to find real advantages first, CBA produces decisions that hold up under later scrutiny instead of decisions built on inflated scores and gut feeling.

It takes more upfront structure than a simple pros-and-cons list, but for a decision that is expensive to reverse or hard to defend later, that structure is exactly the point.

Build Stronger Decision Skills with SSDSI

Structured decision tools like Choosing by Advantages work best alongside a structured improvement framework. SSDSI delivers IASSC-accredited Yellow Belt, Green Belt, and Black Belt training that teaches the DMAIC methodology behind sound, data-backed decisions, through onsite, live virtual, public, and self-paced formats.

SSDSI has certified 5,322+ professionals across 600+ organizations in 52 cities, backed by a 5-star Google review rating. If your team wants to build this kind of decision discipline company-wide, a conversation about the right certification path is a solid next step.

Lean Six Sigma Green Belt Training Brochure

Related Articles