The Canary in the Coalmine: A Hidden Warning within Decision-Making

Have you ever witnessed the conversations occurring soon after a meeting, which question the choices made? Alternatively, in slower time, have you seen the plan decided upon gradually wither on the vine, from a lack of buy-in during implementation? The above outcomes are not un-common in the field of decision making, and the reaction may be “to do some leadership” and ensure everyone falls into line. The potential problem with the conform response, is that it ignores the reason for the doubt. A phrase often used within decision making for displaying uncertainty when considering options is indecision or indecisiveness; unhelpfully, both words have social connotations, having a loaded meaning for mangers and leadership within organisations.

STOP kicking the can down the road

Collective decision making, either by a form of consensus or formal vote, places the individuals involved in a position where they must express an opinion or preference. Indecisiveness, commonly defined as a more chronic condition that affects all aspects of life, is thus less likely within senior leadership teams. Indecision, however, occurs less often and for example may only present itself when certain issues are being raised, if there is significantly complex data to understand, or if there is a questioning of values. The implications of indecision for a leader when faced with uncertainty, may result in behaviour that either avoids or masks this position, rather than resolve the doubt in question.

Pitfalls of execution-oriented mindsets, succumbing to the illusion of control

Frequently, self-imposed pressures to hastily make reactive decisions, prioritizing execution prematurely, can amplify decision-making biases and result in heightened levels of risk-taking. Under such circumstances, the CEO appears to embody a reactive white knight, steering their company towards a black hole.

Decisive action may be evidence of effective leadership, however it may also obscure indecision, as steps are taken to avoid the perception of not being able to decide. The expression “kicking the can down the road,” the preference to do nothing or delay which is then presented as a decision, is well recognised. Yet where there is insufficient justification for this choice or a lack of prior scrutiny, delay may again mask indecision. A more damaging position potentially is that of the team member who leaves the meeting with their doubt or indecision unresolved. In these circumstances, whether the individual has conformed to the majority as part of groupthink and not wanting to appear indecisive or has felt unable to challenge the position taken by an appointed or dominate leader, the potential exists for the uncertainty and indecision over the chosen solution to remain.

The presence of unresolved doubt or indecision, after deciding on a way forward within members of a board or senior leadership team, has serious implications. The continued uncertainty may impact the organisation’s cohesion, as conversations undermine the chosen solution; a flawed decision may occur as clarity over which is the better option is not tested by the voice of the lone dissenter. Individuals may ruminate over their failure to challenge, or inability to challenge and disengage with the plan, and acceptance be misinterpreted for agreement. The consequences for Futures planning of strategic decisions that lack scrutiny and challenge, thereby not making full use of the boardroom’s cognitive ability or do not convince others in the way forward are clear.

Futures Thinking – seeing the Weak Signals

By the very nature of Futures Thinking, any decision is going to have varying degrees of uncertainty. The VUCA environment against which Probable and Preferred outcomes are assessed and the potential for emerging technologies sending Weak Signals of future alternatives, will inevitably make the executive decision challenging. Indecision is not necessarily a failure or weakness; a rational amount of questioning is an important part of deciding, and the difficulty of choosing between options can be indicative of a thorough and unbiased process delivering practical alternatives. The directors of a board or members of a senior leadership team need to question and challenge, to resolve any personal uncertainty; there comes a point though when a decision is needed. Accepting the requirement for quorum, most decisions are based on a majority rather than being unanimous, allowing for disagreement and then consensus to support the chosen course of action. If members of your team leave the room and you hear they are soon questioning the choice made or do not seem to be implementing the plan with the expected drive, they may need some “leadership”. However, there might also be another reason, and indecision or uncertainty might be the canary in the coalmine that warns of a ‘Futures plan’ which may not be all that you think it is.

Leading with the Future in mind

The duty that leaders bear in shaping the future trajectory of their organization is fraught with challenges, and many will offer hindsight critiques. Therefore, making optimal decisions with the available resources at the time and ensuring that your board or team not only agrees but comprehends, is paramount.