My decision-making method is intuitive, then systematic, with only one point difference between the two. When I decide, I rely on my feelings, make decisions based on hunches and instincts, and do what feels right now.

But I am also equally systematic, making decisions slowly and carefully. 

I like to have all the facts before I proceed with my intuition to make the best choice by looking at all options. For example, the following is a list of questions that I found pertinent to ask and discuss with potential adopters before adoption (HPA!, 2023):

1. Am I ready to commit to caring for a rescued cat or dog for its lifetime, including providing food, shelter, regular veterinary care, and possibly unexpected/emergency veterinary care?
2. Can I devote the time and patience to transitioning a rescued pet into my home?
3. Do I acknowledge and understand that a rescued pet may need a concerted effort to learn how to behave in its new environment?
4. Is everyone in my household in agreement to adopt?
5. Does anyone in my household have known animal-related allergies?
6. Does my apartment complex or landlord have any pet quantity or breed restrictions?
7. Did I write my landlord to request permission to foster or adopt the pet?

Emmerling and Rooders (2020) are also an excellent source in decision-making and suggest: 

Keep the group small when making an important decision. Large groups are much more likely to make biased decisions. Choose a heterogenous group over a homogenous one (most of the time). Individuals with homogeneous opinions and beliefs have a greater tendency toward biased decision-making. Appoint a strategic dissenter (or even two). One way to counter undesirable groupthink tendencies in teams is to appoint a "devil's advocate" You can just collect opinions independently.  To get the most out of your team's diverse capabilities, we recommend that you gather your opinions individually before people share their thoughts with the broader group. Provide a safe space to speak up.  Without fear of retribution, encourage members of the team to actively engage in discussion of divergent opinions, doubts, and experiences in a respectful manner: focus feedback on the decision or discussed strategy, not on the individual; express comments as a suggestion, not as a mandate: and lastly, say feedback in a way that shows you empathize with and appreciate the individuals working toward your joint goal. Refrain from over-rely on experts. Experts should be informed outsiders to the group. Share collective responsibility. One person should not be the sole influence as the group's messenger. In creating a community strategy, a team and balanced approach using a strategy for decision-making would suffice and make sure everyone is heard and respected. I would also add one or two devil's advocates.