Indecision: The Graveyard Of Good Intentions
"People say I am indecisive, but I am not so sure about that." I have seen this quote attributed to a former US President, but I doubt it. First, it is too intelligent a comment for him and, second, he is far from indecisive. The liberal pundits trying to attribute that quote to him confuse indecision with defective decision making. You can figure out who the President is on your own; however, it is irrelevant. This article is about leadership not politics. Organizations confronted with a decision-challenged individual in a leadership role, is adrift in the sea of serendipity. They bobble around having no direction.
The Problem With Indecision
Indecision is worse than a bad decision. With direction, even poor direction, the individuals affected can properly plan its execution, implement mitigations for its problems, and define contingencies when its plans start to falter. Rivals to the direction do the same, obviously, in an opposing manner. The result is a set of critical plans covering nearly all aspects of a decision—regardless of the decision's quality. Indecision denies the framework for proper planning. It leaves everyone unprepared to suffer consequences of fate, removing the ability to influence the result to fit the stakeholder's requirements.
Fear of the Poor Decision
The source of paralyzed pronouncements is the fright of a poor decision. Affected individuals, with the best of intentions, hide their fear behind two general behavioral traits—ignorance and over analysis.
With blissful ignorance, also known as unrealistically optimism, the hope is that all will work out based on the misguided belief that there really are no problems. In this situation, the realist is considered negative, a pessimist, disruptive to the team, and is usually banished from the organization. In the end, this is the best outcome for the realist. Otherwise, they are condemned to eternal frustration and, if their prognostications become reality, they wear the blame for the self-fulfilling their prophecy. No one wins.
The opposing trait is deferring the decision in anticipation that new specks of data will create an irrefutable edict. Analyze, collect data, analyze more, and search for more data. The typical scenario brings in consultant after consultant to assess the problem and leaders wait for the answer they want to hear. Meanwhile, time ticks away and fate takes its toll.
Decision Do Not Preclude Change
Poor leaders do not make bad decisions; poor leaders refuse to admit weaknesses in their decisions thereby failing to correct the flaws. By acknowledging that a decision has faults, leaders create an environment that fosters critical thinking. This is an environment that reinforces every aspect of success: critical thinking prior to the decision, wide spread support of the decision, and development of mitigation plans when weaknesses are found in the decision. Most importantly, when (not if) flaws are found in the decision, it provides the platform for non-accusatory change. The result is that lessons are learned in an atmosphere devoid of blame. Everyone wins.
Understanding the reasons for the indecision is fundamental in affecting change. Attempting to push the eternal optimist to accept reality or convince the consternated analyst that the data in conclusive, is fruitless. You must define alternate route. The only avenue to address the issue is your ability to objectively lead.
It takes a leader to make effective decisions. The person's position or rank is irrelevant. The leader is identified, in part, by their ability to make and be accountable for decisions, to assemble a team to assist in the definition, execution, and continued critical evaluation of the decision.
Accountability, though, is the most critical trait. It instills trust from the team and the stakeholders. It is contagious. Peers and subordinates will step up and model the behavior. In short, accountability subverts a superior's indecision. It imbues leadership below the consternation and drives the organization forward.