Sunday, 28 August 2011 00:00

Indecision: The Graveyard Of Good Intentions

Rate this item
(0 votes)

"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 he actually siad this. 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 the decision's execution, understand its risk, develop mitigations, 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 the consequences of fate, removing their ability to influence the result to fit the stakeholder's requirements.

Fear of the Poor Decision

The source of paralyzed pronouncements is the fear of a poor decision. Affected individuals, with the best of intentions, hide their fright behind two general behavioral traits—ignorance and over analysis.

With blissful ignorance, also known as unrealistically optimism, the hope is that everything 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 their "self-fulfilling 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.

Good Decisions 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.

Affecting Change

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 is conclusive, is fruitless. You must define an 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 earns 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.

Read 10538 times

Related items

  • Comparing Organizational Change Management Models

    A few weeks ago, I set out to write a post on the comparison of various organizational change management (OCM) methodologies and realized that would be a disservice to my readers. It would simply drag you down the path of implementation while failing to focus you on building the foundation. The pressure was too much and I have relented to numerous requests on making that comparison. The caveat is that juxtaposing these models is not comparing different varieties of oranges or even apples and oranges; we are surely comparing the peel to the fruit they contain. Hence, comparing methodologies like Kotter's model (the peel), Prosci's ADKAR (the core), and General Electric's Change Acceleration Process (the whole fruit) need a different approach.

  • The Executive-Project Manager Gap

    It was such an innocuous question, "Working on an article; what is the biggest problem you see with project governance at orgs? Can you comment?" Can I comment? Really? That is like cheese to a mouse. Where could I start—bureaucracy, draconian process, poor executive sponsorship, disengaged leaders? Plenty of fodder, because they all lead to project failure. I fired off, "Creating an over bureaucratic morass stifling innovation & implementing process instead of cultivating leaders." Then the maelstrom started and it went directly to the gap between the executives and projects managers. Naomi Caietti, Robert Kelly and I had a great conversation. Most of the thread is below.

  • Disband Your PMO

    After nearly 30 years of project work, I struggle to understand the role of a project management office (PMO). Even though, I have written of the pros and cons, and read a plethora of articles, opinions, and how-to guides little has been done to convince me that the PMO is reducing project failure. It seems to be nothing more than a tool to fill a void in leadership? Even the acronym, which is so widely thrown around, has little meaning as the "P" has no less than four meanings. It is an executive's crutch for their lack of understanding in how projects work. These, like other, unattended holes in the corporate accountability create opportunities for new and greater bureaucracies and empires that further obfuscate accountability.

  • The Catch-22 of Organizational Change Management

    "Kotter, ADKAR, or CAP which methodology should we be using to build our approach to improving project adoption?" I hear this question repeatedly from people trying to implement an organizational change management (OCM) program. The problem is that is the wrong question. Take a perfunctory peek at any of the models and you will see that in the quest for an answer people have mistakenly jumped over the first few steps and they head down the road of failure. It is a Catch-22; unless you already have an OCM process in place, you will most likely fail at implementing it. Putting one in place, however, is a change—one of the most difficult cultural transformations your company will undertake. As a result, people jump to the solution stage, which is well down the change management process path (which, they did not know, ironically, since there was no procedure in place).

  • Project Inception - Designing Organizations For Success

    Buy it now!

    A failing project’s fate is destined long before assigning a project manager. Its doom is sealed from the time the customer envisions the idea. Traditionally, project inception is defined as when the customer comes to a solution provider (internal or external to their organization) asking for a product or service. In actuality inception is much earlier. It starts when someone says, “Wouldn’t be neat if I could...” From that point forward the customer’s exceptions are set, changed, and reset as the process of discovery refines the concept. The customer’s ideas change from what they want to what they need, while continually constrained and formed by the realities of an ever-changing business environment. Although people cite unrealistic expectations as major problem during inception, the constant change in expectations causes the real issue—misalignment. For project managers to make a significant difference in a project’s success, they must use a new paradig.

Leave a comment

More Info on Project Recovery


Please send me more information on fixing a failing project.

Made with BreezingForms for Joomla!® by Crosstec

Rescue The Problem Project

Internationally acclaimed

Image of RPP

For a signed and personalized copy in the US visit the our eCommerce website.

Amazon logo
Buy it in the United States Buy it in Canada Buy it in the United Kingdom
Buy it in Ireland Buy it in Germany Buy it in France
Buy it in Italy Buy it in the PRC
Buy it in Japan
Book sellers worldwide.

Upcoming Events

Other's References