The idea
Immediate value isn't the only consequence of a choice. Some decisions alter the future option set and the cost of responding to new information.
Worked example · illustrative
Paying for a refundable booking
Situation. You are booking accommodation for a family visit whose dates may change. A nonrefundable room costs less; the same room with cancellation until a week before arrival costs extra. Both meet your needs if the visit goes ahead.
The tempting conclusion. Choose the cheaper room because the stay itself is identical.
What changes the view. You’d be paying extra for the chance to cancel and get your money back if the dates change. That could help while the visit is still being planned. But if you won’t know the dates until a few days before arrival, the cancellation deadline will already have passed. And if the dates are settled, you may not need that flexibility.
What this supports. The refundable room might be worth the extra cost if there’s a real chance the dates will change and you’ll know before the deadline. If the price difference is large, or you’d find out too late to cancel, it may not help much. The useful question is whether this booking gives you room to change the plan when you might need to.
Useful when
Watch for
Preserving optionality has a cost. Don't spend heavily protecting against every imaginable future.
Where this came from
Startups, Research and development, Star Trek
Lineage
Reversibility and one-way/two-way doors in Six Years of Applied ML developed into the Kirk/Spock discussion of preserving future options.