This is the Electi Review. Today, why averaging your decision criteria can quietly kill you? The elector method. That's Elimination et Choix. Traduisant la Realité, built by Bernard Roy and his team in France starting in 1964, tested on a real client problem in 1965, published in 1966, exists because weighted scoring lies to you. Give price enough weight, and a supplier scoring nine on cost and one on delivery reliability can beat a supplier scoring four across the board. The math checks out. The decision can still be a disaster. Elector refuses that trade. It's non-compensatory. Instead of one blended number, it compares alternatives pair by pair, asking two questions. Does this option have enough weighted support, concordance, to outrank the other? And does it carry a weakness bad enough to trigger a veto, regardless of how well it scores elsewhere? A strong price advantage does not erase an unacceptable defect rate. That's the entire argument in one sentence. Weighted scoring asks who has the highest total. Electri asks who is sufficiently supported and free of a disqualifying failure. It's not free. The method needs indifference thresholds, preference thresholds, and veto limits, all of them judgment calls, all of them capable of flipping the result if set carelessly. It can spit out incomplete rankings, ties, even relations that don't resolve cleanly. It takes more analytical work than a scorecard, and it has variants. Electri I through IV, IS, TRY, each suited to a different job, ranking, sorting, or choosing under uncertain weights. So picking the wrong variant undermines the whole exercise. The honest use case, a small short list, conflicting criteria, and at least one failure mode the business genuinely cannot absorb at any price. Skip it when everything reduces cleanly to money and one option already dominates. Electric doesn't make the decision moral or objective, it just refuses to let a spreadsheet bury the one flaw that actually matters. That's the review.