Zapproved Blog

We are re-posting here, with permission of GTDTimes, the third part of a series that Monica is authoring on more effective decision-making at work. 

Editor’s Note: This is the third installment on how to be a more effective leader during a group decision making process. You can find the first and second installments of this series at their respective links, here and here. The author of this series, Monica Enand, is the CEO and Founder of Zapproved, a web-based application that helps companies manage, track, archive and most critically actually make good decisions in a simple, easy to use format that GTDtimes believes offers one of the best solutions anywhere for the often frustrating process of reaching consensus when too many stakeholders nonetheless must all have a say. Check out Zapproved right here.

In Part 2 of this series on Getting Decisions Made, we focused on creating the proposal that will be sent to others. As in most things, proper preparation is crucial to success. Once you’ve thought through what to ask, honed your words and pulled together the right information, it’s time to share it with others.

You may remember this quote which appears in Chapter 2 of Getting Things Done:

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but never simpler.”

Albert Einstein             

Einstein’s concept for minimizing is the perfect mindset to have when getting ready to share a decision for consideration by others. Ensuring that the right group of people is involved, and not a single person more, will increase the odds of getting to consensus successfully and painlessly.

Since the realities of today’s corporate environments mean that 9 times out of 10 these proposals will be considered electronically, much of my advice will be directed toward the medium of email. However, the same principles apply if you plan to have a face-to-face meeting. Although meetings have their place, in today’s connected world they are being seen as less and less efficient uses of time.

To Include or Inform?

The first stage is to gather a list of all the stakeholders in the decision. This list will include your peers and colleagues that will share the work, your managers who will be responsible and others who simply need to know what’s going on.

Now comes the important part: Sort this list into the following categories:

1. Decision-makers – One whose explicit agreement is necessary for the decision to move forward. Ask yourself if a person’s objection would stop the project. If not, then don’t include them in this group.

2. Observers – A person who should be informed about the process but whose inclusion is not a requirement. This group can often include managers and executives that have delegated this responsibility to you and your team.

3. “Laters” – Those people that will be affected but result but do not need the information until it is concluded, such as direct reports, consultants or other teams in the organization. Do these people need to see how the proverbial sausage is made?

Now do your best to make that list smaller. Too often people err on the side of over-informing which slows decisions, waters them down and lowers the value of the process in the first place. If everyone is “included” on a decision, it doesn’t take long to realize that no one has any real authority either. Keeping a group tight and focused will not only get faster responses but also increase the commitment to the outcome.

When sending a proposal by email, put the Decision-makers in the “To” field and then copy the Observers in the “CC” line. For the last group, the “Laters,” send them the results of the final decision after it is concluded.

Once this is in email, the benefits of refining the group will be obvious. Noted tech blogger Robert Scoble wrote recently that the number of emails required to get an action done in a corporation is equal to the number of recipients squared. For example, a group of 8 will generate 64 emails. That isn’t scientific, but it’s not far off because everyone will want to contribute and react to comments by others. It quickly spins out of control and eats up much more time than it should. The resulting chain of emails will be nearly impossible to record for future reference.

In another study by Basex Research, they found that 30 percent of emails inside of companies is “corporate spam” which they define as CC’s or “Replies to All.” Just take a look at your own inbox and chances are you’ll find yourself nodding in agreement! Seek out alternative ways to use new collaborative technologies that can limit the chains of email and keep the conversation in one place.

Finally, it is important to be transparent. Never make use of the BCC when making a group decision on email because it undermines the process and organizational trust. Also, discourage side conversations. By sharing information openly, the agreement will be sufficiently vetted and there will be an accountability model in place.

The final installment of Getting Decisions Made will focus on issues of concluding an agreement and building accountability among the group.