Decisions: Never easy to make?

hard to decide?

We can all name a country where the cult of the leader reigns supreme and where it appears that an individual (or even an elite group of individuals) makes all decisions (good or bad) without debate or democratic process. We refer to these places as authoritarian states or dictatorships.

We perceive them to be a bad models with a propensity for, or at risk of, adopting uninformed and malevolent positions at the unfettered whim or belief of the leader concerned. General opinion is that there are few benign dictators out there. Don't know why? Maybe absolute power is rarely a good thing?

A classic caricature of organisations from the past is a hierachical approach to decision making where a leader sits atop an organisation and knows everything and who makes decsions in an autocratic way. People look up to the boss and expect (even rely on) that person to make good decisions. It is one way of making decisions. It may work well in some situations and it still flourishes in smaller businesses where the leader and owner are one in the same.

At some stage this approach no longer works well; for instance, as family businesses out-grow their origins or as businesses outgrow their old ways of working. If an autocratic approach to decision making is the sole model used in an organisation of any scale we can see a potentially flawed business.

Modern day dynamics lead people to expect (demand?) empowerment and involvement. Leaders are no longer universally expected to be the best at everything in the business. The role of leadership has morphed into that of conductor of the orchestra, setting a tempo and getting the best out of a team of great people. We have therefore seen a swing away from commend-and-control towards a more empowered and egalitarian approach.

But making decisions isn't as simple as that.

Taking a decision applies to leaders at all levels - whether leading a global business, a start-up, or leading a small team within a larger organisation. It is what we ask leaders to do every day and choosing the right style of decision making in each instance is a critical skill that effects not only the quality of the decision but also its subsequent success and buy-in from all impacted. It is also a key determinant of how teams work and people are empowered.

Before exploring these we should note that cultural norms (geographic or sector based) will impact upom the ways that decisions are made. In many cultures hierarchy and deference to authority are deeply woven into the national business psyche, whilst in others inclusivity and empowerment is more the norm. Leadership culture will drive the way and the speed that decisions are made. To be discussed at some later date.

There are also some cultural differences around what a decision actually is. In some cultures its a direction of travel that can be changed - in others its a firm immovable stake in the ground upon which implementations can now be planned. Again not for immediate discussion in this blog but it seems that a decision isn't all that it seems.

Putting culture aside. There are three main models that a leader can deploy to arrive a a decision. Each one is valid and appropriate in different circumstances. Deploying the right approach in each instant is a critical skill that becomes instinctive for really great leaders.

Autocratic

The leader makes the decision with or without input from his teams. This approach might appear intrinsically old fashioned or arrogant behaviour on first inspection. But it may be the best way to make some decisions ie where the leader is best qualified or has more knowledge to make a call or where a decision is time-critical and no options exist for prolonged debate. Deployong this approach ensures decisions get taken quickly but risks the quality of the decision and sometimes the buy-in gained from a team. An extreme example of an autocratic decision: a critical warning alarm sounds in the cockpit of a commercial airliner - we expect the pilot flying to instantly decide what to do (the decison is time critical and given the extent of training, checklists, and flying experience provided we trust the pilot to make the right call). In this example there is no time for prolonged debate or to form a committee.

In business there are similar time critical decisions, and also ones where the leader is best qualified to make the correct call.

Consultative

Using this decision model the leader still makes the decision but only after taking advice from the team and consulting interested or qualified other parties. The leader will proactively gather advice and opinion and will weigh up the pros and cons and use this to reach a decision. Importantly a leader will ensure that it is clear that consultation is simply asking for input/advice/opinion. It does not bestow any democratic equity in the final decision. This approach allows individuals to have their input and be involved. It does imply that the final decision may not align with all inputs or opinions received.

Consensual

A process that takes more time and debate but where a consensus is reached by a group of invididuals or parties (maybe a leadership group or cross functional working group) . Here the leader does not reserve the right to make the decision but opens the final conclusion to the consensus reached by the group.

This approach both democratises and prolongs the decision process but ensures maximum buy in. The deployment of this approach should be communicated at the outcome of the process to ensure all are clear what is going to happen,

Deploying the most appropriate mix of models will ensure that decisions can be informed, timely and high quality. Get it wrong and you can alienate those involved. Mislead them about the process or model being deployed and you can expect to disenfranchise some great people.

There is no single way to arrive at the best decision. You decide.