πŸ’¬ Decision-making and ambiguity

Replied to Decision-making and ambiguity by Doug BelshawDoug Belshaw

Instead of hierarchy or unspoken assumptions, progress happens by following a path between over-specifying the approach, and allowing chaos to ensue.

In practice, this often happens by one or a small number of people exerting moral authority on the group. This occurs through, for example:

  • Successfully having done this kind of thing before
  • Being very organised and diligent
  • Having the kind of personality that put everyone at ease
Doug, I really liked your point about progress through balance and negotiation. I am not sure if it was written in response to my question, if so, thank you.

As a side note, is the military always ‘hierarchical’?

Hierarchies are a form of organising that can work well in many situations. For example, high-stakes situations, times when execution is more important than thought, and the military.

David Marquet’s Greatness makes the argument that there is nobody on a submarine who is across everything, otherwise it would not work.

I wonder if instead organisations like military run a dual-operating system?

One response on “πŸ’¬ Decision-making and ambiguity”

  1. Hi Aaron, that post wasn’t directly responding to your question, but I guess it answers it obliquely!

    In terms of the military, I’m no expert, but I would have thought that hierarchy was a way of ensuring people didn’t get out of their boxes, but instead stuck to their roles πŸ™‚

    I guess what I’m suggesting is that life is more interesting (and creative!) when people define themselves, and what they’re trying to achieve, more loosely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *