I am not-very-far-at-all into Decisive by Chip & Dan Heath, but even just from the introduction it's apparent that the book has a huge overlap with a lot of CFAR's Instrumental Rationality content. And I know from reading Switch (also a great book) that they are thorough researchers and enjoyable authors.

I suspect that even if most of the concepts are old hat, it will be helpful to have more analogies, both for my own sake and to facilitate better explanations of CFAR concepts to people-unfamiliar-with-our-terminology.

The table of contents... (text in parens indicate my guess as to what it relates to, sometimes just from the title, other times I glance at the pages)
Widen Your Options
- Avoid a Narrow Frame (alternative hypothesis generation)
- Multitrack (related to comfort-zone expansion, affordance-generation; not getting stuck in ruts)
- Find Someone Who's Solved Your Problem (updating on others)
Reality-Test Your Assumptions
- Consider the Opposite (e.g. status quo bias)
- Zoom In, Zoom Out (outside view)
- Ooch (I had no idea what this was, but the first page yields "to ooch is to construct small experiments to test one's hypothesis")
Attain Distance before Deciding
- Overcome Short-Term Emotion (System 1 vs System 2, urges vs goals)
- Honor Your Core Priorities (goal factoring, winning at arguments)
Prepare to be Wrong
- Bookend the Future (confidence intervals, bookends refer to the min/max etc)
- Set a Tripwire (schelling points/fences, murphyjitsu / planning kata / contingency planning)
..
- Trusting the Process (a concept proposed in GTD unit... just skimmed the chapter though and while it appears valuable/useful, not obviously linked to CFAR stuff)

So basically this is just workshop-in-a-book. I mean, lacking the food/face-to-face-time/intensiveness/instructors-to-ask-questions-of/interactivity/commitment-mechanisms/followup/community, but otherwise seems to be a good literature review on instrumental rationality. Again, I've barely started it, but the authors are good and this is a good topic, so I would bet high odds on it being worth reading.