Separating Decision Gathering from Decision Making

Post

In today's fast-paced tech environment, organizations must make swift and effective decisions to stay competitive. However, the quest for perfect consensus often leads to paralysis by analysis, stalling progress and innovation. To navigate this challenge, it's essential to separate decision gathering from decision making.

The Pitfall of Seeking Consensus

While inclusive decision-making sounds ideal, aiming for full consensus can be counterproductive. In growing organizations, especially all-remote companies, striving for unanimous agreement doesn't scale effectively. It can lead to prolonged discussions, diluted outcomes, and missed opportunities.

At GitLab, they recognize that consensus doesn't scale. Instead of seeking unanimous agreement, they focus on trusting their decision-makers and embracing iteration. This approach prevents unnecessary slowdowns and keeps the organization agile.

Decision Gathering: Harnessing Collective Intelligence

Decision gathering is the process of collecting input, ideas, and feedback from team members. It's a critical step that ensures diverse perspectives are considered, fostering innovation and preventing blind spots.

Best Practices for Effective Decision Gathering

Open Communication Channels: Utilize tools like collaborative documents, forums, or surveys to gather input from all relevant parties.
Set Clear Deadlines: Define timeframes for feedback to keep the process moving.
Encourage Diverse Opinions: Create an environment where team members feel safe sharing unconventional ideas.
Document Inputs: Keep a transparent record of suggestions and considerations for future reference.

Decision Making: Empowering the DRI

After gathering input, the responsibility shifts to the Directly Responsible Individual (DRI). This person analyzes the collected information and makes the final decision.

Who Can Be a Decision Maker?

Diverse Team Brainstorming

Decision makers are often tech leads, staff engineers, or individuals with significant experience. However, mid-level engineers can also be decision makers. Empowering mid-level engineers promotes growth and diversifies leadership within the team.

Reducing the Risk of Poor Decisions by Mid-Level Engineers

Mentorship and Guidance: Pair mid-level engineers with senior mentors who can provide advice without undermining their authority.
Clear Decision Frameworks: Provide guidelines and criteria to help them make informed decisions.
Iterative Approach: Encourage small, reversible decisions that can be adjusted as needed.

The Decision-Making Process

After gathering input, the DRI should:

Review All Feedback: Thoroughly consider all perspectives and data collected.
Evaluate Options: Weigh the pros and cons of each possibility.
Make an Informed Decision: Choose the option that best aligns with project goals and organizational values.
Communicate the Decision: Clearly explain the reasoning to the team.

Is Voting Necessary?

While voting can gauge team preferences, it isn't always the best method for decision-making in this context. Relying solely on votes can:

Favor Popularity Over Merit: The best decision may not be the most popular one.
Delay the Process: Organizing and conducting votes can be time-consuming.

Instead, the DRI should use the gathered input to inform their decision, balancing various factors without being bound by majority opinion.

Handling Decisions Not Supported by the Majority

It's possible that the DRI's decision may not align with the majority's preference. In such cases:

Communicate Transparently: Explain the rationale behind the decision to foster understanding.
Emphasize Organizational Goals: Highlight how the decision aligns with broader objectives.
Encourage Open Dialogue: Allow team members to express concerns and address them constructively.

Should the Decision Maker Seek Consensus?

While considering team input is important, seeking full consensus isn't always feasible or necessary. The DRI should aim for alignment rather than consensus, ensuring that team members understand and support the direction, even if they initially disagreed.

Integrating RFCs and ADRs into the Process

Role of RFCs (Request for Comments)

Structured Feedback: RFCs provide a formal way to propose ideas and solicit feedback.
Documentation: They create a written record of proposals and discussions.
Collaboration: RFCs encourage input from a wide audience, fostering inclusivity.

Role of ADRs (Architectural Decision Records)

Decision Documentation: ADRs record the decisions made, along with the context and reasoning.
Knowledge Sharing: They help current and future team members understand why decisions were made.
Accountability: ADRs hold decision makers accountable for their choices.

How They Fit into the Process

During Decision Gathering: RFCs are used to propose ideas and collect feedback.
After Decision Making: ADRs document the final decisions and the rationale behind them.

By incorporating RFCs and ADRs, organizations can enhance transparency, improve communication, and maintain a historical record of decisions.

Cultivating a Collaborative Culture

Collaboration

For this separation to work, organizations must foster a culture of trust and collaboration. GitLab embodies this through their Collaboration value, which includes:

Kindness: Treating colleagues with respect and understanding.
Sharing: Openly exchanging knowledge and resources.
Short Toes: Being open to others stepping into your domain without taking offense.
No Ego: Prioritizing team success over personal accolades.
Assuming Positive Intent: Believing colleagues are acting in the company's best interest.

The Benefits of Separation

Separating decision gathering from decision making offers several advantages:

Agility: Enables quicker responses to market changes and internal needs.
Innovation: Encourages diverse ideas without bogging down the decision process.
Employee Engagement: Team members feel heard and valued, boosting morale.

Overcoming Challenges

Transitioning to this model may feel awkward for those from traditional corporate environments. Here are some tips to ease the shift:

Communicate the Change: Clearly explain the new process and its benefits.
Provide Training: Offer workshops or resources on effective collaboration and decision-making.
Lead by Example: Have leadership demonstrate trust in DRIs and respect for the process.

Conclusion

Separating decision gathering from decision making is a powerful strategy to enhance efficiency and innovation. By valuing input without being hindered by the need for consensus, organizations can move forward confidently and swiftly. Empowering a range of team members, including mid-level engineers, as decision makers fosters growth and diversifies perspectives. Incorporating tools like RFCs and ADRs enhances transparency and documentation. Embracing this approach, along with fostering a culture of trust and collaboration, positions companies to thrive in the dynamic tech landscape.

Author's Note: Implementing this strategy requires commitment and cultural alignment. Leaders must champion the change and model the behaviors they wish to see. Over time, teams will adapt, and the organization will benefit from more agile and effective decision-making processes.