Open Decision-Making (2014)

Something I would add to the process is an early exploration of the organisational outcomes relevant to the decision. Goals and measures of success first (hopefully including some leading measures), solutions last.

Sometimes those are enough - solutions can be left to those closest to the problem. Hence OKR, 4DX, Tight-Loose-Tight, etc

“If you see a snake, kill it. Don’t play with dead snakes. And everything looks like a snake at first.”

I think it was intended in a different context to decision making, perhaps more ideas in general. But it came to mind non-the-less.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemawashi

Japanese decision making (especially in big orgs) is consensus driven. Multiple stakeholders are consulted, various options considered, all opinions weighed (in theory). This process is, consequently, not very agile and the more stakeholders the more time a big decision will take. Not until everyone is happy is a final decision put down.

But part of this is because once a decision is made, Japanese companies will full-send commit to its execution. And those designated as having the power to execute will execute fully at all possible speed. Attempts to reverse or change course mid-execution are discouraged — partially because decisions on how or what to do in response will take a similar amount of time.

The result is really, really committing to making sure everyone buys into the idea because once the horse leaves the stable there is no turning back.

The drawback to this is twofold: half-baked plans that are forced to be made due to schedule pressure, or decision paralysis that results in maintaining status quos (for better or for worse)

Perhaps it’s me, but it almost feels like the author perceives that managing a company is the same as making a stack of decisions, and the piece covers well how the CEO relates to other employees in the decision-making process.

While making decisions is certainly an important part of what a CEO does, managing a company also involves managing how decision making happens within the organization: that often means helping decision making happen with less and less direct involvement of the CEO.

Indeed, as an organization grows, the number of decisions to be taken grows too, and so an important aspect of any framework for effective decision making involves managing people, and designing the organization, in such a way that decisions are moved away from the CEO.

In this sense, it would have been interesting to read more about when and how a CEO should let others take over the process for certain decisions, how a CEO should pick which decisions to be involved in and which should be delegated, or how a CEO should evaluate the performance of the organization’s decision making capabilities.