Search

Faster Decisions in Complex Times: How Leaders Can Empower Teams to Act More Swiftly

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD
2 hours ago
7 min read

Listen to this article:

Abstract: This practitioner-oriented research brief examines strategies that leadership teams can adopt to cultivate an environment where teams can make prudent yet prompt decisions. As the business climate becomes increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA), empowering teams to align and act swiftly when conditions merit speed provides a competitive advantage. However, hasty decision-making can also lead to unintended consequences if issues are not fully understood. Drawing from 15 years of research and consulting experience, the brief explores how fostering a culture of psychological safety allows diverse perspectives and learning to surface before consensus, streamlining governance in proportion to complexity, and curating advisory structures strategically can reduce barriers to team alignment. Industry examples from high-performing organizations like Amazon and Google demonstrate these approaches in action. The brief concludes that by developing a "decision-ready" mindset and culture, leadership teams can position their groups to navigate flexibly at a sustainable yet efficient cadence, responding nimbly to shifting market needs.

The pace of business is faster than ever before. Leaders are under mounting pressure to make decisions quickly to gain competitive advantage and keep up with rapid market changes. At the same time, most organizations now operate in a VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous) world where problems are murkier and require varied perspectives to solve (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014). This makes the process of decision-making more challenging.

As a consultant and researcher, I have seen both the benefits and drawbacks of trying to accelerate decisions. Moving too hastily can lead to regret or unintended consequences if underlying issues are not fully understood. At the same time, analysis paralysis can neutralize competitive opportunities or fail to capitalize on fleeting windows of opportunity. The key, I have found, is not necessarily to make faster decisions per se, but rather to empower teams to act more swiftly when conditions merit speed through developing decision-ready culture, processes and mindsets.

Today we will explore research-backed strategies that leaders can adopt to cultivate an environment where prudent yet prompt choices are the norm. T

Fostering a Culture of Psychological Safety

A significant body of research indicates that cultivating psychological safety is key to enabling groups to make timely choices (Edmondson, 1999; Schein & Schein, 2016). Psychological safety refers to a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking, such as admitting a mistake or asking for help. When people feel heard, respected and not embarrassed or punished for uncertainties or slip-ups, they are willing to openly share opinions without fear of repercussion. This open dialogue allows diverse perspectives and dissenting views to surface before consensus is reached, leading to wiser decisions grounded in richer discussion (Schein & Schein, 2016).

Teams with high psychological safety levels also feel comfortable changing previously held assumptions or beliefs in light of new evidence through transparent experimentation and iteration (Faraj & Yan, 2009; Schein & Schein, 2016). Rather than defending past choices dogmatically, a psychologically safe culture fosters a growth mindset of continuous learning and adjustment, enabling teams to pivot or reverse course more nimbly if early course corrections are merited based on lessons learned. An iterative approach to decision making means choices can be made and adjusted in an agile fashion to keep pace with rapidly changing external factors.

To build psychological safety, leaders must role model being open to feedback and admitting errors; timely apologizing and showing vulnerability when needed (Schein & Schein, 2016). They should encourage speaking up by valuing diverse viewpoints and dissent; avoiding publicly criticizing individuals from whom they dissent. Regularly soliciting anonymous feedback and using 360-degree assessments also helps create an environment where individuals feel able to flag issues proactively before problems escalate (Edmondson, 1999). These actions reassure people that taking interpersonal risks like disagreeing or proposing alternatives is not personally threatening and will not jeopardize their standing or career prospects within the group.

With a culture of psychological safety in place, differences in perspectives become more freely shared and scrutinized before implementation. While discussions are livelier and decisions richer, the time required to achieve alignment and closure is reduced since more viewpoints are surfaced earlier on (Schein & Schein, 2016). The group's capacity for fast yet prudent choices increases, as does its agility to amend plans that experience early hiccups. Rather than stalling decisions waiting for perfect consensus that may never fully arise, psychologically safe teams can achieve “good enough” alignment more swiftly and adjust course iteratively through a transparent learning process (Edmondson, 1999).

Streamlining Governance and Engagement Pathways

Another way leaders can aid faster yet prudent choices is by establishing lightweight yet strategic governance mechanisms and stakeholder involvement protocols (Kennedy, 2008). Heavy multilayered approval checkpoints tend to introduce delays while adding little value, particularly for less complex or risky decisions that others are capable of handling (Kennedy, 2008). At the same time, not establishing any controls risks incohesive outcomes or lack of buy-in. The aim should be proportionate pathways tailored to the nature and stakes of different types of choices.

For more routine decisions with minor impacts or uncertainties, a light "one up, one down" governance model can suffice, involving only the decision-maker and their direct supervisor for oversight and sign-off (Kennedy, 2008). Greater speed can be enabled through mechanisms like limiting initial proposals or discussions to a single page executive summary. This helps avoid "analysis paralysis" from over-studying trivial matters (Kennedy, 2008).

More strategic choices likely to significantly impact budgets, functions or timelines warrant broader early involvement of key allies and decision "customers" (Marrone, Tesluk & Carson, 2007). Rather than a rigid sequential approach, leaders can map various stakeholders’ level of authority versus level of interest/impact in the decision to determine the optimal timing and mode of their engagement (Marrone, Tesluk & Carson, 2007). Some may simply need orientation to understand implications; others merit deeper consultation to secure buy-in. Using technologies like online survey tools and virtual whiteboard sessions keeps the process nimble and asynchronous.

Leaders can also establish advisory teams or councils curated to ensure diversity of thought regarding particular types of strategic choices (Kennedy, 2008). Comprising representatives from impacted areas, these temporary governance structures provide a forum for proactively scrutinizing proposals from different lenses before formal decision-making occurs (Kennedy, 2008). This surfaces nuances or "show-stoppers" in advance, short-circuiting potential bottlenecks or rework down the line. With light administration, advisory forums need not unduly tax participants' time yet meaningfully expedite prudent choices.

By applying light governance models suited to different decision requirements, leaders make maximum use of others’ inputs while focusing efforts where they will add most value. This balance of empowerment and oversight positions teams to align on strategic directions faster with less friction points along the way.

Industry Examples: How Leading Firms Enable Swift Choosing

Perhaps no organization exemplifies moving with speed and agility better than Amazon. As a pioneer in rapid experimentation and iteration, Amazon's success stems from cultivating a culture where teams are expected to make many decisions per day and learn quickly from both failures and wins (Maurya, 2012). Founder Jeff Bezos coined the term "invent and experiment" to highlight how trying numerous low-risk initiatives, evaluating outcomes transparently, and scaling wins rapidly is central to the company's competitive edge – despite inevitable wrong turns along the way (Maurya, 2012).

To this end, Amazon invests heavily in building psychological safety across the organization. Disagreement and alternative viewpoints are not only accepted but encouraged (Maurya, 2012). Teams have autonomy for fast-paced A/B testing and are given forums like weekly “idea storms” to share and debate possibilities freely (Maurya, 2012). Transparency regarding what works and what doesn’t is prioritized; managers lead by example through public post-mortems of off-target ventures (Maurya, 2012). Together these measures allow diverse, risky ideas to be floated, debated openly and tested at light speed continuously.

Google also thrives by empowering staff to make choices swiftly yet judiciously through mechanisms like its famous "20% rule" (Maurya, 2012). This policy reserves one day per week for employees to work on passion projects that interest them using company resources, a liberty which has birthed innovations like Gmail (Maurya, 2012). It fosters psychological safety and intrinsic motivation by signaling everyday work can be more about exploration than drudgery.

Additionally, Google created “Googlegeist” councils comprising peer-elected representatives across departments tasked with surfacing issues to leadership proactively (Maurya, 2012). This advisory structure ensures strategic choices incorporate grassroots sentiments and needs, while also giving staff avenues to flag impending challenges early before they derail important initiatives.

Together these examples illustrate how industry frontrunners combine aspects of culture, process and environment to position teams at all levels to make and actualize prudent yet timely choices continually - as the dynamic business landscape demands.

Conclusion

In today's volatile world, the ability to choose well yet swiftly provides a competitive edge that differentiates leaders. This brief explored research-backed techniques leaders can employ to cultivate decision-ready teams capable of prudent yet prompt aligning on important issues when circumstances warrant speed. Fostering cultures of psychological safety where diverse views are freely shared and tested, streamlining governance in proportion to complexity, and curating advisory structures strategically are means of reducing barriers that can gridlock progress, enabling teams to leverage input from varied perspectives more nimbly.

With a cooperative yet agile orientation, organizations can respond to fleeting market shifts and seize emerging chances proactively in real time - all while ensuring choices are well-reasoned. Rather than racing to a finish, the emphasis is on positioning groups to navigate at a sustainable yet efficient cadence. For leaders aiming to empower their teams in a VUCA world, cultivating this decision-ready mindset is key to helping organizations thrive in times that demand fast yet prudent maneuvering.

References

Bennett, N., & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What VUCA really means for you. Harvard Business Review, 1(1).
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
Faraj, S., & Yan, A. (2009). Boundary work in knowledge teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 604–617.
Kennedy, M. T. (2008). Getting counted: Strategic project management office best practices. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 12-22.
Maurya, A. (2012). Running lean: Iterate from plan A to a plan that works. O'Reilly Media.
Marrone, J. A., Tesluk, P. E., & Carson, J. B. (2007). A multilevel investigation of antecedents and consequences of team member boundary‐spanning behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1423-1439.
Schein, E. H., & Schein, P. A. (2016). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Associate Dean and Director of HR Programs (WGU); Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD/HR/Leadership Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2025). Faster Decisions in Complex Times: How Leaders Can Empower Teams to Act More Swiftly. Human Capital Leadership Review, 26(4). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.27.1.4