When presenting proposed budget changes to faculty, which practice is most consistent with data-driven decision making?

• A. Providing a concise summary of outcomes and supporting research
• B. Offering only qualitative impressions
• C. Focusing on personal opinions of stakeholders
• D. Withholding relevant data to simplify the presentation

Answer: (A)

Data-driven decision making relies on evidence from outcomes and research to justify changes. When presenting proposed budget changes to faculty, offering a concise summary of what has happened and the research that explains those outcomes shows exactly how the proposal will affect resources, programs, and results. This approach makes the rationale transparent, allows faculty to see the metrics that matter, how projections were made, and the anticipated benefits or trade-offs. It supports accountability and helps stakeholders evaluate implications with real data. By contrast, relying only on qualitative impressions, emphasizing personal opinions, or withholding relevant data hides the evidence and can undermine trust and informed judgment. For example, linking a proposed budget change to measured outcomes like course enrollment, retention, or degree progress, and citing the supporting research, makes the case concrete and assessable.