Spine For Rent

SPINE FOR RENT? The lost art of decision making. by Blaine Pardoe Decision making has become something of a lost art in the corporate world. There are a lot of reasons for this, but all seem to have one thing in common: to make a decision, good or bad, has risk associated with it. Why not simply make good decisions? Well, people who make decisions sometimes make the wrong ones and, as a result, suffer at the hands of weak-minded upper management. Because of this, many managers and employees are in-bred thinking, "It's better to make no decision than a wrong one." There seems to be a disparity in some companies when it comes to decision making. Pardoe's Fifth Law of Grossly Incompetent Management is this: "The bigger the bad decision, the less impact on your career." There is also the corollary to this law: "The higher you are in the management food chain, the bigger the mistake you are allowed to make." (Hey, I don't claim to understand why this is the case, it's just my job to point it out.) The truth of the matter is that in good companies, every successful executive makes some bad decisions in their career. The key to success is to make more good decisions than bad ones. But they all make some sort of decision--good or bad. All too many times I've found my project, people, or myself grappling with the North American sloth-like non-decision-maker. It's a hideous creature that lumbers about the corporate world, stumbling into people who work for a living, and not making decisions. Worse yet, most of these creatures have a title--some sort of reward for lacking the spine that even the tiniest lizard has. Case in point, look at what happens to people who make incredibly minor bad decisions. Companies often do the equivalent of having a manager drawn and quartered as an example to everyone else that this behavior is not tolerated. We've all heard the stories of Bob or Judy who botched some minor little decision like the color of napkins for the company Christmas party, only to be exiled to working in the copy room, a symbol to others that might make the same kind of earth-shaking blunder. On the other hand, we've all seen that Vice President, Partner, or Divisional Manager who screws up a multi-million dollar project, trashing the careers of countless employees, wasting a bazillion hours of time and effort. And the punishment for this bad decision making? Usually assignment to another project. (I guess this is to see if they can repeat themselves, just to see if it's a trend.) Okay, so why the disparity here?It comes from the fact that if a high-ranking manager/execudroid makes a, well, a "mistake," it reflects badly on those that hired that person. Someone actually took the time to put that moron in position where they could screw-up on a grand scale. The bigger you are, the more stupid you make the handful of people above you look when you make a bad decision. Thus, in the big leagues of upper management, when you blow a decision, it gets buried. You get another chance to make another bad decision. Or, better yet--if you play it right--you get promoted, perpetuating the concept of "If we had more people like you, we'd have less people like you." This is how the cycle of non-decision making begins. Managers and employees just starting out get burned for minor infractions of the space time continuum. In turn, they are taught to not make decisions or defer decisions to others. This makes them seem more "managerial" to upper management, so they gradually get promoted (much to the chagrin of those that work with them). Once in a position of real power, they lose their fear of making bad decisions, seeing how nothing bad happens to their new set of peers that can't pick their own underwear without guidance from a committee or steering group. Then these newly risen lords of the corporate realm begin to make decisions which are bad, and are rewarded for them…which encourages them to make more bad decisions. This may all seem a bit confusing, but it does explain a lot in terms of how most companies work.. While I cannot speak for the rest of you out there, cowering in your cubicles, wondering if you pick the wrong wallpaper for the company kitchenette, if you'll end up working in the mail room. What I can do is say this. I'll stick to making decisions, good or bad. Let the chips fall where they may. Let them pour the bottle of red ink into my permanent record. I'd rather be known for at least trying to move the company forward, rather than fearing every action I take. This spine is not for rent. SPINE FOR RENT? The lost art of decision making. by Blaine Pardoe Decision making has become something of a lost art in the corporate world. There are a lot of reasons for this, but all seem to have one thing in common: to make a decision, good or bad, has risk associated with it. Why not simply make good decisions? Well, people who make decisions sometimes make the wrong ones and, as a result, suffer at the hands of weak-minded upper management. Because of this, many managers and employees are in-bred thinking, "It's better to make no decision than a wrong one." There seems to be a disparity in some companies when it comes to decision making. Pardoe's Fifth Law of Grossly Incompetent Management is this: "The bigger the bad decision, the less impact on your career." There is also the corollary to this law: "The higher you are in the management food chain, the bigger the mistake you are allowed to make." (Hey, I don't claim to understand why this is the case, it's just my job to point it out.) The truth of the matter is that in good companies, every successful executive makes some bad decisions in their career. The key to success is to make more good decisions than bad ones. But they all make some sort of decision--good or bad. All too many times I've found my project, people, or myself grappling with the North American sloth-like non-decision-maker. It's a hideous creature that lumbers about the corporate world, stumbling into people who work for a living, and not making decisions. Worse yet, most of these creatures have a title--some sort of reward for lacking the spine that even the tiniest lizard has. Case in point, look at what happens to people who make incredibly minor bad decisions. Companies often do the equivalent of having a manager drawn and quartered as an example to everyone else that this behavior is not tolerated. We've all heard the stories of Bob or Judy who botched some minor little decision like the color of napkins for the company Christmas party, only to be exiled to working in the copy room, a symbol to others that might make the same kind of earth-shaking blunder. On the other hand, we've all seen that Vice President, Partner, or Divisional Manager who screws up a multi-million dollar project, trashing the careers of countless employees, wasting a bazillion hours of time and effort. And the punishment for this bad decision making? Usually assignment to another project. (I guess this is to see if they can repeat themselves, just to see if it's a trend.) Okay, so why the disparity here?It comes from the fact that if a high-ranking manager/execudroid makes a, well, a "mistake," it reflects badly on those that hired that person. Someone actually took the time to put that moron in position where they could screw-up on a grand scale. The bigger you are, the more stupid you make the handful of people above you look when you make a bad decision. Thus, in the big leagues of upper management, when you blow a decision, it gets buried. You get another chance to make another bad decision. Or, better yet--if you play it right--you get promoted, perpetuating the concept of "If we had more people like you, we'd have less people like you." This is how the cycle of non-decision making begins. Managers and employees just starting out get burned for minor infractions of the space time continuum. In turn, they are taught to not make decisions or defer decisions to others. This makes them seem more "managerial" to upper management, so they gradually get promoted (much to the chagrin of those that work with them). Once in a position of real power, they lose their fear of making bad decisions, seeing how nothing bad happens to their new set of peers that can't pick their own underwear without guidance from a committee or steering group. Then these newly risen lords of the corporate realm begin to make decisions which are bad, and are rewarded for them…which encourages them to make more bad decisions. This may all seem a bit confusing, but it does explain a lot in terms of how most companies work.. While I cannot speak for the rest of you out there, cowering in your cubicles, wondering if you pick the wrong wallpaper for the company kitchenette, if you'll end up working in the mail room. What I can do is say this. I'll stick to making decisions, good or bad. Let the chips fall where they may. Let them pour the bottle of red ink into my permanent record. I'd rather be known for at least trying to move the company forward, rather than fearing every action I take. This spine is not for rent.