Blog on effective decision making in teams

Effective decision-making models a prerequisite for high performance teams.

When we work with management teams and boards we often ask; why do you exist and what is the most important mission for the team?
Each group responds a bit different, but one response is always included: We make decisions.
Then we ask how their decision-making process looks like, how they document the decision-making process and how they ensure learning and continuous development of their decision-making.
Surprisingly few management teams can respond adequately to these questions. Most decisions are made out of habit, in the same way all the time.
The problem is that we too often think that it’s pretty easy to make decisions and that we assume that we know how to make them. We also often assume that a group automatically makes better decisions than individuals. That is only true under certain conditions.
To create a good model for decision-making we need to be conscious about how the brain works when we make decisions, what traps that exists and how to avoid them.
We work differently as individuals when we make decisions. Some rely on instincts other on the intellect. It reflects the two separate systems that we use when we process a decision, the emotional and the rational decision-making system, which enable different parts of our brain.
The psychologist Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize in economics for his findings on decision-making traps, and who wrote the best-seller “Thinking, fast and slow”, is talking about two different system of thought. System 1 which cannot be switched off, in which all impressions are processed incessantly and out of this chaos created patterns and meaningful stories, without effort, also when there is nothing to see more than chance. System 2, on the other hand, understands statistics and is more prone to doubt than belief, but requires in return time and conscious effort to operate. That is why this deeper thinking often is muted.
The trick is to create a good decision-making process that utilizes both of these systems and to learn in which situations we can get the greatest benefit out of respective system. It is also important to be aware of the most common decision-making traps that the brain deceives us with – mainly because it wants to save energy and that the “working memory” cannot handle complex situations with more than 3-4 variables.
The emotional system, which is faster than the rational, also has a lot of programmed values and functions that were extremely important a few thousand years ago, but can be very misleading when we are making decisions in today’s boardrooms. For example; how we overvalue data that are repeated often, whether they are true or not, how we evaluate potential losses much higher than potential profits and how we automatically searches for the facts that support the decisions that we, consciously or unconsciously, have already made.
To make good decisions in a group process requires certain qualities in a team. There is a large risk of group thinking if the team is too homogeneous, or if you have a very dominant leader. A group whose members are encouraged to think independently and where differences in opinions are highly valued usually make much better decisions. A team where the leader highlights and encourages the positive conflicts that exist in the team also makes smarter decisions.
Surrounding factors also have surprisingly large significance for how well we make decisions. An effective decision-making process involves how to create the best conditions for good decisions. Stress, low blood sugar and how many decisions were made already that day affects our decision-making ability much more than most of us would like to admit. There are countless studies and experiments that show how catastrophically bad decisions are made when stress, fatigue and low blood sugar are making both our rational and emotional decision-making system to collapse.
Each team needs to find its own decision-making process, but a good simple model to start from are Pelle Tornells method . The advantage of it is that it uses the entire brain capacity in making decisions and builds on the knowledge that we need to take advantage of both the emotional and rational decision-making system in order to make good decisions.
In short, the model can be described like this:
First the team has to make a common picture of the outcome of the decision, a strong emotional image of what should be achieved. It provides both clarity and emotional involvement in the decision.
Then you collect the facts you need for the decision. Here you have to be objective in both the search and the valuation of the information.
In the next step, you have to be aware that there are two systems operating in interaction. It is the emotional system that is creative and coming up with ideas and proposals, while the rational will evaluate and see the consequences. Are there some decision-making traps that we have stepped in? How much should we rely on our gut feeling? Should I ignore the feelings of doubt? What kind of decision type am I and the team, and what do we especially have to watch out for based on that?
Then it is time to question and challenge your decision. There are various ways of encouraging questioning and exploring options in a team. But strategic long-term decision needs some kind of “Devil’s advocate” that champion the problems, risks and alternative solutions, before taking the final decision.
Finally you have to check how devoted the team is to the decision. Making decisions is a matter of personal responsibility. Many times a group takes bad decisions because no one in the group has taken personal responsibility, or that some members are not committed. Take a moment and think of the decision. How does it feel in the heart, stomach and brain? Can you and everybody else commit to this decision wholeheartedly? If not, start over again until it feels just right.

How does it work in your workplace? Do you have a clear decision-making process that is continuously evaluated and improved? Or do you assesse only the results of your decisions in retrospect?
Probably you could improve your decisions with relatively small efforts.

At BestTeam we work to create high performing teams. Do you want to know more about how we work, please contact me at peter.englen@bestteam.se.