A decision can be formally approved without being equally understood. The real challenge for organizations is ensuring that different teams can act on the same decision without pulling in different directions.
Most organizations spend considerable time deciding what to do. They examine alternatives, discuss risks, agree on a course of action, document the decision and assign responsibility. Once it has been approved, attention turns to execution.
But approval does not necessarily establish a common understanding of what the decision means to the people expected to carry it out.
A decision may receive broad support. Yet, as work begins, people across the organization have to apply it to their own responsibilities and priorities. Those responsibilities and priorities are not necessarily in conflict. Each may reflect a legitimate concern.
However, people working from the same information and acting responsibly may give different weight to different aspects of the situation. They may reach different conclusions about what the decision requires. Even when they agree on the intended outcome, they may differ on what needs to happen next.
Those differences can lead to choices that pull in different directions.
When that happens, the response may focus on communication, accountability or execution. Sometimes those are exactly the right places to look.
But there may be a more fundamental question.
Different views, a common decision
Organizations need people with different expertise and different ways of looking at a problem. These perspectives can bring forward risks, priorities and consequences that might otherwise be missed.
But different perspectives do not automatically create a shared basis for acting on a decision.
That does not mean everyone should think alike or approach the work in the same way. Different functions may need to make different choices. What matters is whether they understand the commitments behind the decision well enough to make those choices without working against one another.
What is the decision meant to achieve?
Which trade-offs have been accepted?
What is expected to change?
What can each team decide for itself?
The answers may make sense within each area of responsibility. The challenge is what happens when those choices have to come together.
What approval tells us
An organization can record who approved a decision, what was agreed and who is responsible for acting on it.
But a record of approval does not, by itself, tell us how the people involved understood what the decision required, or whether they share the same expectations about what should happen next.
A clear record can create the impression that the meaning of the decision is equally clear to everyone. The differences may only become visible later, in the choices people make, the priorities they pursue and the commitments they take on.
By then, the organization may be dealing with the consequences rather than the original difference in understanding.
A question worth asking
This does not mean everyone must understand a decision identically, or that differences between teams are a sign of failure.
Communication, accountability and sound execution remain important. But they do not answer a more basic question:
When a decision is approved, how does an organization know whether the people responsible for carrying it out share a sufficiently common understanding of what has been agreed, even when they approach the work differently?
__
Sign up for our newsletter to get the latest innovation news and more sent to your inbox.
