In the traditional geomatics workflow, we emphasize data accuracy, objectivity, and error minimization. However, the transition from geospatial data to information and insights requires a methodological leap that many analytical frameworks fail to bridge. Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) occupies a unique position in this landscape, synthesizing quantitative input data with the fluid, qualitative priorities of human decision-makers. This presentation explores the Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) technique as an example of this normative approach. By analyzing the sensitivity of outcomes to varying parameter settings, we demonstrate that MCE is not merely a tool for geospatial analytics but a sophisticated platform for scenario modeling and conflict resolution. The session concludes with a discussion of the subjectivity paradox: how geomatics professionals can maintain scientific integrity while incorporating value judgments in their analyses.