The former US president Theodore Roosevelt once said: “In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next-best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.” I love this quote for several reasons.
It points out that the worst thing you can do is make no decision at all. In business, millions of decisions are made every day: minor and major, easy and difficult decisions. Sometimes, millions of dollars or people’s jobs may be at stake.
Many decisions involve more than one person — meaning a team. Should we assume that, if teams make lots of decisions, they’re also good at it? I would love to say yes, but in my experience, the answer is no.
When I work with a team, we inevitably come across the question of the decision-making process within the team. It could be a minor thing (“Where shall we go for our next team lunch?”) or a more important issue (“What are the core values and principles that lead our daily work as a team?”) — and, yes, for some, lunch is a major issue, too.
With most of the teams I work with, I like to do the following exercise. It’s quick, insightful and fun. And, interestingly, it’s also a meta exercise. This means the team learns about decision-making methods and works on its decision-making skills at the same time.
How it works
I start by presenting three types of information:
- Three categories of decision-making methods
- Seven types of decision-making methods
- Seven pro/con pairs (= one for each method)
The team now has one task: to assign each pro/con pair to the right method and each method to the right category. To give you a better idea of how hard or easy that task is, here are the categories and methods I’m talking about:
Categories
- One person decides
- Everybody votes
- Inclusive
Methods
- Majority vote: the proposal with the most votes is accepted.
- Top-down: the leader decides.
- Consensus: everyone must agree, otherwise no decision is made.
- Consent: a subgroup of the team comes up with a proposal. The whole team can ask questions or raise concerns. The subgroup revises the proposal, and the team votes on whether the revised proposal should be implemented.
- Systemic consent: for each proposal, everyone is asked to give their level of resistance (0 = no resistance; 10 = very strong resistance). The proposal with the least resistance is accepted.
- Dedicated group: a group of team members is given the task of asking all stakeholders for their perspective and finally decides for the team.
- Empowered expert: one team member with the relevant experience and expertise gets the job of deciding for the team.
The task begins
I write the three categories on a pinboard, the methods and pro/con pairs are written on cards or sticky notes scattered all around the board.
Next, I start the timer (ten minutes), and the team starts to move the cards. Before I start the timer, I provide one important hint: “When you want to make a decision, it’s helpful to agree on a decision-making method first.”
Everybody hears my hint, but they all forget it within seconds — maybe because of the time pressure. Or maybe they think they know better. Sometimes, after a minute of chaos, someone will ask if they shouldn’t first discuss how they make their decisions. Often, this question remains unheard.
As the team works on the solution, many decisions are made within the ten minutes. The way teams move forward varies a lot. Some discuss each card and put it in its place only when everyone agrees (consensus). In other teams, one team member takes the cards and places them without discussion (top-down). Sometimes, there’s one team member who says: “I have an idea. Let me do it. If you disagree, let me know” (mixture of empowered expert and consent). Other teams distribute the cards and let each team member decide where to put them. Then, the group decides if they want to change anything (mixture of dedicated team and consent).
It’s in these ten minutes that the magic happens. The team is working on decision-making methods and applying various methods as they do the exercise. Most teams switch from one method to another, and back again. Of course, I could just put up a PowerPoint slide to explain the different methods and their pros and cons, but that wouldn’t have a lasting effect. Participants would forget the information as soon as they left the room.
It’s much better to experience it. For example, the consensus teams (who move a card only when everyone agrees) always run out of time. This is a clear disadvantage of that method. On the other hand, the decisions they do make are robust. Other participants experience for themselves that a top-down method is fast but also frustrating, or they see that an empowered expert must enjoy a high level of trust within the team.
After ten minutes, we look at the results and I provide feedback. Here’s where Theodore Roosevelt comes in: it’s better to make a wrong decision than no decision, because there is no feedback for cards that haven’t been assigned. In other words: if you make no decision, you can’t learn from it.
Most of the time, after a second round, the teams are happy with the result and proud of what they’ve achieved. I love this exercise because people not only experience and learn a lot about decision-making in a team, but also learn where there’s room for improvement in terms of cooperation and trust. And I have a better idea of what to work on next.