Answer: Who knows? (Read on for the “correct” answer.)

Mushy Decision Making

Approximations of the dynamic in the above scenario when making decisions are quite common. Typically, such scenarios later result in one or more of the following symptoms:

• A team member gets upset and says, “I never agreed to that!”
• A team member follows up with the team and asks if they had in fact made a decision, which then causes confusion and further discussion amongst the team around what the decision was
• Revisiting the same topic at another meeting because it wasn’t clear what had been decided
• Nothing changes and no one brings it up again; the discussion was for nothing
• The team goes back to the drawing board because no one is clear if they had agreed to even change the meeting time in the first place, or if they were just trying to decide on the new proposed time

Clear decisions are crucial for growth and success. Clear action is preceded by a clear decision. Without clear action, real impact, change, or success is limited.

The above scenario is based on a rather simple and low-impact decision. Now, consider the many decisions teams and organizations need to make on a regular basis and imagine the impact such mushiness has on an organization’s productivity, effectiveness, and morale. The results aren’t pretty.

The Signs of Clear Decisions

Pop Quiz #2: Look at your current work team. Do you know when your team has made a decision? If yes, what objective signs tell you that your team has made a decision?

Amongst the teams I’ve consulted with or coached, most aren’t able to say yes. If they do, when I ask for objective signs that they’ve made a decision, they typically stumble around for a minute before realizing that they really don’t know.

The bottom line is this: unless every team member can answer yes and explain their process for making decisions, the team doesn’t have a clear process.

Making the Decision to Make Clear Decisions

It’s not enough to have a clear process for making decisions. Unless everyone knows what the process is, some of the above symptoms will surface. Therefore, two elements are crucial for making clear decisions:

• A clear decision-making process needs to be established
• Everyone involved must know what the process is

Circling back to our initial scenario and Pop Quiz #1, was the decision made? Assuming everyone knew the process, if the process only required two people on the team to verbally say yes, then the decision was made. If the process was by majority vote and silence equals consent, then the decision was made. And so on. However, my guess is that based on your and my experience of similar scenarios, no clear decision was made.

The process itself for making decisions ultimately doesn’t matter, nor do teams need to use the same process every time. Whether it’s by consensus, majority, autocracy, or any other process, what most matters is that the two decision-making elements above are used for any decision. Ultimately, the team leader will decide and is responsible for making sure everyone on the team knows what that process is. That said, some processes are better suited for certain types of decisions or teams, so it’s important to choose thoughtfully. Check out this article for examples of decision-making styles, including the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Questions for reflection:

• If you aren’t the team lead, how can you influence establishing a clear process for making decisions?
• What decision-making processes would generally best suit your team?
• What benefits could incorporating the two decision-making elements have for your team and/or organization?

Clear roles and responsibilities.

The Significance of Clear Roles and Responsibilities

The lack of clear roles and responsibilities yields many symptoms that are often misdiagnosed. Leaders tend to focus on dealing with these symptoms without realizing how they are part of a bigger problem. In fact, about 80% of organizational dysfunction can be traced to unclear roles and responsibilities. Some examples of roles and responsibilities include:

• Standards and expectations
• Defined job duties
• Decision-making processes
• Protocols, procedures, processes, and policies
• A clear chain of command
• Sponsorship
• Written documentation

When these elements are vague or non-existent, organizations fall apart. Work stalls, confusion ensues, conflict escalates, waste increases, and energy drains.

The Impact of Unclear Roles and Responsibilities

Let’s look at some common misdiagnoses and some go-to strategies that usually don’t resolve the issue:

• Two teams are assigned to work together on a larger project. Team A is responsible for the final product, and Team B is responsible for improving the processes to produce the product. Team A withholds information, avoids Team B, and generally blows them off. The project manager keeps telling them to work it out themselves using mediation, communication, and conflict resolution skills.
• A leader tries to push through a change initiative but continually gets pushback from colleagues who say things like, “You’re not my boss.” Despite senior leadership endorsing the initiative and thinking it’s a great idea, the leader can’t get any traction. They try various change management strategies, but none seem to work.
• Meetings don’t seem to accomplish much. Participants have lots of dialogue and ideas, but afterward, nothing comes from the conversations. On top of that, the meetings are unfocused, go over the time allotted, and include people who don’t even need to be there. People give feedback on how everyone should stick to the agenda and come away with action items, but it just doesn’t seem to happen.
• Two colleagues are developing an idea together. Shawna, an engineer, is feeling drained from trying to give input that doesn’t seem to land. She also doesn’t want to overstep her bounds. Mario, a builder, doesn’t understand why Shawna is even involved given that she isn’t offering much practical guidance and that he is pretty confident in what he’s doing. Balls seem to keep being dropped. Despite trying to take accountability for their respective mistakes and using conflict resolution strategies, time is getting short without much to show for their effort.

These scenarios are like the story of Alexander the Great who, instead of trying to untie the Gordian knot, simply cut through it with a stroke of his sword. Instead of using various skill-based approaches, what’s really needed are clear roles and responsibilities.

The Way Forward: Clear Roles and Responsibilities

As I mentioned in the list above, there are various aspects of roles and responsibilities such as sponsorship, clear job duties, and established decision-making processes. Let’s revisit the above scenarios and see how some simple clarification addresses the core issue.

• Instead of the project manager forcing the teams to work out the issue themselves, they recognize that, as the manager of the project, they are in a sponsorship role. That means that it’s their job to set standards and expectations for project outcomes and define what each team’s role is in relation to the project. They need to make it clear to Team A how they expect them to work with and include Team B. This sets the guidelines and foundation for the teams to work together and establish a clear protocol for the project.
• The leader pushing through the change initiative needs active sponsorship from senior leadership, not just an endorsement. The leader needs to ask them to step in and publicly sanction the initiative and set expectations for engagement. Although this doesn’t (and shouldn’t) be in a Draconian way, some basic explanation for the “why” and encouraging participation lets everyone know that the initiative isn’t going away with some authority behind it.
• The meetings need the role of a clear leader who also assigns roles such as notetakers and timekeepers, creates the agenda, and aligns both the content and stakeholders to the desired outcomes. The team needs to decide on (or at least be aware of) what their decision-making process to move forward with ideas they discuss. They also need someone to capture action items based on those decisions, and someone to follow up with them.
• The two colleagues need to create an agreement for how they’ll work together and who will do what. Given her area of expertise, instead of wondering how to engage with Mario, Shawna can present approaches for how she’ll provide feedback and direction (format, frequency, etc.) to Mario and get his agreement on those approaches (or negotiate). Each can clarify what they need from the other person, and agree on who will do what at each step of the project. They can also decide how they’d like to make decisions for moving forward and stick to the process, as well as who will capture and follow up on actions.

Diagnosing and Discovering Roles and Responsibilities

Again, most dysfunction and difficulty stems back to unclear roles and responsibilities. The trick is figuring out how to clarify them. In times of trouble, below are some questions to help clarify. Most of the time, the answers will lead you to the solution.

• Can each person who is involved describe what their role is to everyone else?
• Can each person who is involved describe what everyone else’s role is?
• What is the process for making decisions?
• What is the process for tracking actions?
• Who is the clear sponsor (the person/people who can impose formal consequences should it come to that)? What level of engagement is needed from them?
• Does everyone know the standards, expectations, processes, or rules that are expected of everyone involved? If they don’t exist, who will create, communicate, and enforce them?

Common Reasons Why People Don’t Speak Up

As I mentioned, there are no one-size-fits-all answers to why people don’t engage. However, based on my experience working with countless teams and feedback I hear from colleagues, peers, and stakeholders, here are some common reasons:

• Not Listening
  Some leaders just flat-out don’t listen. Literally. They’re on their phones, tuned out, distracted, or not hearing anything that’s being said. When people don’t think you’re listening, they don’t think it’s worth speaking.
• Shutting People Down
  Arguing, dismissing, judging, belittling, and criticizing are some ways that leaders shut people down. This could look like telling someone they’re making too big a big deal out of an issue, saying that someone’s idea is stupid or mocking it, or not acknowledging someone’s comment and quickly moving on.
• Paying Lip Service
  Some leaders attend lots of training and know all the “right” ways to act, but can fall into the habit of going through the motions. They might nod, paraphrase, and praise, but it can come off as insincere and manipulative. On some occasions, leaders will use these techniques to convince people that they care when they really don’t. Leaders don’t think people will notice, but they pretty much always see right through it.
• Not Taking Action
  There are many times when leaders will ask for feedback and ideas but don’t follow through with them. The feedback either goes into the ethers, isn’t acknowledged, or implemented. Or, leaders will ask for ideas and then just go with their own. People then wonder why they were asked in the first place.

The Underlying Reason Behind Why People Don’t Speak Up

The thread that runs through the above reasons is a lack of trust in leadership. People don’t trust that they are heard, that they matter, that there won’t be negative consequences for speaking up, that they’re supported, or that leaders sincerely care.

Over time, people shut down. They don’t see any value in sharing or speaking up. If you find yourself facing this situation, chances are high that you exhibit some form of the above behaviors and probably don’t realize it. You’ve most likely somehow broken trust. As a litmus test, the degree of which people don’t engage is often proportionate to how much they do or don’t trust you.

Getting People to Speak Up

Trust is easy to break, but hard to fix. There are no silver bullets. It will take consistent effort over time for people to feel safe enough to share. It is possible, so long as you are committed to looking at yourself and changing your behaviors instead of trying to change everyone else’s. Here are some ways you can rebuild trust and encourage people to speak up:

• Fearlessly Self-Reflect: Using the above behaviors as a reference, notice which ones may be true for you. Perhaps you are enacting them in more subtle ways. Or, maybe there are other ways you don’t realize you’re behaving. Regardless, ask yourself what you might be doing that contributes to people not speaking up and be willing to look at yourself.
• Take Ownership: When you do notice your behaviors, own up to them. Acknowledge them both to yourself and others, and commit to doing something about them. Publicly naming your behavior and what you intend to do about it can be powerful and create immediate changes in the group. It also gives people context for your changes so they don’t wonder what you’re up to.
• Demonstrate Your Commitment: It’s one thing to say you’re going to change; it’s another to actually change. Create a plan to change your behavior and follow-through with it. One of the most damaging things you can do is say you’ll do things differently and then fall back on old habits. This hurts your credibility and makes it less likely that people will trust you the next time you say you’ll do something.

Then, sometime later, people don’t follow through with the idea. Tasks don’t get completed. Attendance at follow-up meetings is lower. People don’t seem motivated. What happened?

In short, there was no agreement with the decision to move forward.

I see this time and time again. Leaders hear or see what they consider to be agreement from a few people in the group and assume because no one verbally opposes the solution that everyone is on board. What really happens are things like this:

• Some people who nodded did, in fact, think the solution “sounded good” but still needed time to think about it before agreeing to it. Something “sounding good” is different than agreeing or wanting to do it.
• Some people who said “yes” approved of the solution but didn’t realize that they were supposed to be part of implementing it. They thought they were agreeing to other people running with the solution, not them.
• Some people who were silent were afraid to ask for more clarity or share an opposing view. Some needed time to process what was discussed but didn’t say so. Some flat out disagreed but didn’t want to oppose the leader for fear of the consequences. Some didn’t speak up because they flat out disagreed (also, in some cultures silence explicitly means lack of agreement).

As you can see, none of the above responses actually indicate agreement. So, what went wrong?

When asking for agreement, two things are crucial:

1. Being specific about what you want the group to agree to

Before asking if people agree, reiterate exactly what you want them to agree to, including roles and responsibilities. Make sure everyone understands the solution and has space to ask questions to confirm understanding and/or voice concerns. If people don’t seem ready to agree, don’t force the issue (I’ll cover how to “read the room” in a future post). Find out what people need before moving forward.

Key questions to ask the group:

• “Who doesn’t agree with the solution?”
• “What do you need to agree to this solution?”

2. Getting clear and obvious agreement from the group

As I mentioned earlier, silence, non-verbal cues, and even some yesses don’t mean agreement. If you have done the previous step accurately, then it’s important to make a direct and specific request to ensure agreement.

Key request:

• “If you agree with this solution, please raise your hand.”

Notice how this is quite different than asking if the solution sounds good or if everyone’s good with moving forward. Showing agreement based on a clear request is different than asking about agreement. If all hands are raised, you’re in a good place to move forward. If not, go back to step one and repeat. Although this doesn’t necessarily mean that things will move forward as planned, the odds are much greater that they will.

Another key ingredient is having a clear and known decision-making process. I’ll talk about this in future posts.

• “That meeting was a waste of time.”
• “That meeting was boring.”
• “I don’t know why I needed to be at that meeting.”
• “We came out of that meeting with nothing.”
• “I hate those $%#$%$% meetings!”

Most leaders I’ve worked with are unaware of how ineffective their meetings are. When they are aware, they don’t typically know what to do to improve them. The outcome? Cynicism, decreased morale, less productivity, wasted time, and so on. Not what you want for your organization.

The Actual Cost of Meetings

While there are many things you can do to make your meetings more productive, engaging, and exciting (to be discussed in future posts), here’s a simple way to assess how good your meeting is (let’s say it’s a one-hour meeting):

1. Tally up the number of people in the meeting
2. Estimate how much each person gets paid per hour and calculate the average
3. Multiply #1 x #2

The answer to #3 is how much it costs to have that meeting. If you have ten participants and their average hourly pay is $25, the meeting costs $250.

Now, ask yourself if what you accomplished during the meeting was worth that cost. If you were the leader of the company, would you have paid that amount for the meeting? Would the meeting have been worth it if it came out of your paycheck?

Typically, your answer is likely to be “no.”

That’s just the cost in terms of dollars. This doesn’t include the cost of things like lower morale, increased cynicism, loss of focus, wasted energy, and so on.

How to make your meetings worth the cost

So, when you’re considering the cost of your meetings, here are three simple questions to ask that can immediately make your meetings better:

• “What would we need to get out of the meeting to make it worth x dollars?”
• “Who is worth paying x dollars per hour to be at this meeting?”
• “What other ways could we meet the same objectives without having the meeting and pay fewer people for their time (without sacrificing quality)?”

Your answers should give you some direction for future meetings. Unsure of how to answer the questions? Ask the participants. You’ll at least get some insights to start moving in the right direction.

This should get you started. To be continued …