a2hs_explain
a2hs_tap
a2hs_then
I come from a farm where down-to-earth clarity prevailed. That was also the case during the coronavirus period when my sister visited our mother. In her presence, she conducted a Teams meeting for work. There was a lot of back-and-forth talking online. Until, after a while, my mother spoke the legendary words: “How do you actually reach a decision?” With that, she hit the core of where things often get stuck. How do you move from endless discussion to actually settling a decision?
It happens regularly. Within organizations, it is important to make decisions in order to achieve progress. A new strategic direction, the start of an improvement or change trajectory, an investment in new equipment, processes, you name it. Team leaders and managers wonder: when will the board or management team finally make a decision? Meanwhile, the decision-makers wonder when the essential information will be put on the table so they can reach a decision. In practice, it is often underestimated that decision-makers are frequently less informed than people think. Conversely, decision-makers do not always realize that they are not clear about what they need in order to make a decision. This leads to unnecessary misunderstanding on both sides and a loss of time and motivation.
It starts with understanding each other well. What do we need from one another? How are we going to ensure that? In other words: how do practical knowledge and governance experience come together? It is often said that there is insufficient trust. In the vision of Ontwikkelingspartners, it is different. There is often nothing wrong with trust between people (trust). The key is that, as a decision-maker, you need something to have confidence in and believe in (confidence). To what extent does the proposal align with the direction we have chosen? And how well is it substantiated? Is the proposal full of vague buzzwords, or are the facts, observations, and considerations clearly and concretely set out?
We are often good at it: responding immediately to the first question or idea. Or, as one of our clients aptly put it: “re-acting.” Sit in each other’s chair and try to uncover the question behind the question. Is there a clear assignment or request from the decision-makers? And what concrete substantiation is needed from practice? Put yourself in the other person’s role and consider what their responsibilities require. Decision-makers are presented with many issues they must decide on and are responsible for the broader context. By contrast, from practice you often know more about what is happening and what people are experiencing when it comes to this particular decision.
Of course, there are various ways to reach a decision. By using authority. In crisis situations, not a bad choice. But without necessity, a lack of room for input is a missed opportunity. You can vote, where not everyone’s viewpoint is heard and taken into account. Reaching consensus can sometimes be useful, but realize that it can take a long time. Several teams I support have become enthusiastic about consent-based decision-making. Clearly defining the scope and incorporating essential input to truly make progress. This leads to deeper conversations and better decisions that are made in time. I can already hear you asking: how?
In consent-based decision-making, you appoint one process owner to arrive at a clear and concrete proposal. Someone who first gathers input from key stakeholders and those involved. Using this input and their own vision, they develop a substantive proposal. After presenting the proposal, the decision-makers have the opportunity to ask clarifying questions to fully understand everything. Then there is room to refine the proposal with additions and objections. Issues that are still simmering beneath the surface are brought to the table and explored together. With additional ideas and input, you test: is this indispensable now, or do we want to include it in future plans? This prevents endless discussion without reaching a decision. The proposal can be adjusted on the spot or later and finally submitted as a decision. It is important that all stakeholders are present. The final questions to be asked are crystal clear: Is it good enough to try? And can you live with it? Not, as in consensus: Do you agree with it?
Decision-makers who are aware of their responsibility to settle decisions know how to motivate people in practice to move proposals forward decisively. And my mother? With this approach, she would have smiled in approval.
Arianne van Tongeren
Ontwikkelingspartners