Remix.run Logo
▲ lbriner 4 hours ago

A big reason is a lack of agency. I work with large organisations where people cannot or do not know if they can make an executive decision. What to do? Call a meeting with everyone who might have a view on it so that you can then make a decision.

The problem, of course, is when an important person is not available so a decision is not made and then when something comes up mid-week, we need to wait another week to have another meeting.

Give people guiderails, let them try (and fail sometimes) and watch them flourish. On the other hand, tell them that they need permissions from X, Y and Z and watch them do the minimum amount possible.

▲beezlebroxxxxxx 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It's also about lack of leadership and (true) strategy. Many large organizations just careen from "crisis" to "crisis" and are extremely reactive; lacking a long term strategy and clear plan, it becomes extremely hard to actually make decisions.

People endlessly defer because they don't want to be the person to "take the blame" for a decision. Making decisions when you don't connect them to an actual goal/plan/vision becomes a liability. The solution is endless meetings where liability is distributed to...everyone in the meeting. It's successful, in a way, but also exhausting and makes you feel like your job involves just tilting at windmills (imaginary crises).

▲schnevets 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The problem is failure seems more costly than the 30-120 minute call that may align all necessary parties. I think a lot of effective work cultures have moved towards the "move fast and expect mistakes" mentality you describe, but most people/organizations are still carrying mentalities from the "old ways"

▲jsc_ 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> tell them that they need permissions from X, Y and Z and watch them do the minimum amount possible.

ah, this, so much this