zzz Decision Making

Pending archive per https://axelerant.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AH/pages/3378970638

There are, you might recall, five ways to make a decision: Authoritarian (I make it); Consultative (I collect informed opinions before making it); Consensus (we don’t all agree with the decision but do all agree to it); Democratic (we vote, the majority wins, and the minority pretends to accept it); and Delegated (someone else gets to make it). By Bob Lewis

Axelerant has several decision-making forms that typically consider the person to raise the topic to own deciding what to do. Though how they reach that choice might be casual or by in-depth conversations.

First Off, Don’t be Afraid to Decide

Made in fear - Agency Management Tip for Owners

The Simplest Version

Always act in Axelerant’s best interest in line with our Principles and ValuesUNDEFINED.

The Short Version

As many decisions are reversible, get feedback from relevant peers within just enough time and make a good-enough decision that’s not consensus-driven. Afterward, retrospect and iterate. When there are differences, disagree, yet commit towards keeping us moving forward aligned by Principles and ValuesUNDEFINED.

The Long Version

Our intention is for an organization-wide decision-making framework that's consistently applicable for low to high impact and value situations that our people, programs, and projects encounter. It's not meant to be considered the only decision-making mechanism at Axelerant, solely the most common for quickly moving forward with acceptable outcomes.

Therefore, our decision-making framework isn't about finding the perfect option but the most relevant, good enough next step within a reasonably acceptable timeframe.

1. Whoever initiates a discussion is considered as the decision-maker or directly responsible individual (DRI)

   • Anyone at Axelerant can be a DRI and is ultimately held accountable for the decision outcomes.

2. Decisions must align with Axelerant's purpose, mission, and culture, and then they should align with the strategies of the relevant departments and service areas.

   • When cultural values seem to conflict, the decision context should tell you which value takes precedence.

3. DRI must facilitate a good general conversation with relevant stakeholders

   • What would be best for our people or customers?

   • What would be best for the people who are ultimately impacted?

   • What would be for the objective good of the company?

   • What is the root cause of each risk? Can we mitigate it?

   • Can we address the technical- or management-debt in other ways?

   • Can we resolve the underlying anxiety through other means?

   • Is there a long- or short-term tradeoff we can make?

   • Might a benefits, risks, and mitigations discussion model help?

4. DRI can use #disc- Conversation Creator to help with creating a Slack discussion channel

   • When it’s determined by executives or other leadership that a conversation isn’t an active priority, the topic will be closed for later restoration from the People Management backlog.

5. DRI considers the conversation feedback and makes their decision

   • Non-DRI stakeholders should help the DRI make good decisions

   • Silence is acceptance

   • The DRI’s decision may not be the popular one, yet stakeholders must support the decision to the best of their ability even when they disagree.

6. DRI or a delegated to person leads the decision execution

   • Identify specific people for their relevant call to actions

   • Set SMART expectations for desired outcomes

   • Consider RASCI Ownership for relevant roles

   • Documents the decision where relevant

     • E.g., Guidelines, https://axelerant.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AH/pages/1419247623, https://axelerant.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AH/pages/1682604374, etc.

   • Inform relevant people via relevant channels

     • E.g., Slack, monthly announcements, team meetings

   • Retrospect and iterate decision outcomes when relevant

Decision-Making Tips

• 3 Frameworks For Making Complex Decisions

• Aim for minimally viable productions (MVP) and then work to improve them while avoiding starting from scratch

• Be profitable; else, we don't exist.

• Consider over- and under-utilization of current people and resources.

• Decision factor importance varies - historical context, 20% or 80% is good enough, ≥$100K account revenue, etc.

• Default to action as most decisions are reversible

• Do what works and ditch what doesn't

• HBR Better group decision making

• In the first round of decision-making, pick effectiveness over efficiency.

• Minimize efforts for low-value, low-impact, reversible decisions - make the best decision possible of that moment.

• Prevent hidden structures

• Provide just enough systems for the desired results

• Please share what you know by being transparent about how and why we picked the option and what worked or not.