Boiling the ocean will not result in good decisions
As a leader, it is your responsibility to make good decisions. In your department or organization, you are likely called on repeatedly to evaluate and implement a variety of projects. And many of these initiatives will probably require investigation and research in order to determine alternatives and make recommendations. But exactly how much research should one do to be able to make good decisions? That is a conundrum that many leaders face.
There are certainly situations where leaders have been known to make decisions too quickly, without considering all available information. But in my experience, it is the opposite that is much more likely; in their quest for more data or analysis, the job or project is made unnecessarily difficult, and decision-making is delayed.
Don’t try to boil the ocean!
The apt metaphor in this situation is that of boiling a pot of water versus boiling the ocean. Continue reading
If you’re a leader, then you’re responsible for decision-making. Which is why it we have
The self-serving bias is a concept that has been extensively studied in social psychology. Essentially, it is people’s tendency to attribute positive events to their own character but attribute negative events to external factors. It’s a common type of cognitive bias that exists in all aspects of life, including in the workplace.
“Worry is like a rocking chair: it gives you something to do but never gets you anywhere”
“We need to wait until we have all the facts …” is something I hear many managers and supervisors say. It’s often in response to an issue that needs to be dealt with or an unexpected problem that has occurred. Usually the situation is a difficult one and because the manager has no prior experience with making decisions in an identical or similar scenario, s/he is stalling for time. The unfortunate reality of course is that if you wait for all the facts, you might be waiting for a really (really) long time; perhaps even an eternity.
In 1626, King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden ordered the building of the Vasa, a new warship that was intended to become, for that era, the most powerful marine vessel in the Baltic Sea. As was common in warships then, the Vasa was to have a rank of cannons on each side of the boat so that soldiers could easily fire at their attackers, no matter what direction the assault came from.
In my practice, I am routinely asked by leaders in organizations for the definitive factors that lead to team effectiveness. After all, leaders in every organization want to know 
The world is a book, and those who do not travel read only a page. So said St. Augustine in the 4th century. And it’s a doctrine that I’ve taken to heart. Those of you who know me know that I love to travel. However, a recent travel experience taught me a lesson about the danger of becoming complacent, a lesson that applies to leadership as well, and something that I have talked about previously in the blog (see 
By definition, there is always uncertainty in making risky decisions; after all, the old adage “no risk, no reward” holds true. No doubt, leadership instinct and past experience play an important role in determining whether the possible reward is worth the perceived risk, but I am nevertheless often asked by leaders whether there is a more systematic approach to making risky decisions. Decision-making theory abounds with a plethora of techniques and methods, but there is one relatively simple approach that I have found to repeatedly give positive results. Ask yourself: does making the decision result in more options or fewer? If the answer is more choices, then move forward. If the answer is fewer options, then don’t take that action.