Two for One: Untangling Decision-Making in Organizations

Welcome back to Two-for-One, our monthly series where we look at one common challenge in business process management and explore two practical ways to address it.

This month, we turn our attention to decision making. Despite having more data, tools, and analytics than ever before, many organizations still struggle with poor decisions that slow progress and undermine organizational efficiency.

Why Decision-Making Challenges Persist in Organizations

Organizations today face a paradox: while decision makers have access to richer data and more sophisticated technology than ever, the quality of decisions hasn’t improved as much as expected.

Research from McKinsey found that 72% of executives believe bad strategic decisions are just as common—or even more common—than good ones. For business leaders, this is troubling. Decision quality directly affects agility, innovation, and long-term performance. When decisions are slow, unclear, or frequently overturned, organizations lose momentum and erode trust among employees.

The problem doesn’t stem from a lack of data. Instead, it often arises from organizational complexity, unclear accountability, and communication overload. In short: companies know more, but decide less effectively.

What Too Many Bad Decisions Look Like in Practice

If you’ve ever sat in a meeting that goes in circles without resolution, you’ve experienced this problem firsthand. In many organizations, decision making is hampered by:

• Paralysis: too much analysis or fear of making the wrong choice.
• Endless discussions: meetings multiply, but no clear outcome emerges.
• Unclear ownership: no single person feels accountable, so responsibility is diffused.
• Too many cooks: decisions are escalated or dragged into broad forums where expertise is diluted.

A common example is when a relatively routine decision, like approving a small budget adjustment, gets escalated to senior leadership. This slows things down unnecessarily and consumes valuable executive attention. At the other extreme, important “big bet” decisions sometimes fly under the radar until it’s too late to course-correct.

The result is organizational inefficiency: wasted time, frustrated employees, and missed opportunities.

Two Practical Solutions for Better Decision-Making

To help organizations untangle these issues, here are two practical approaches that improve both decision quality and organizational efficiency.

Classify Decisions by Type

Not all decisions are created equal, yet many organizations treat them as if they were. A useful way to break free from this trap is to classify decisions into categories:

• Big bets: high-stakes, infrequent decisions that shape the company’s future (e.g., acquisitions, market entry).
• Cross-cutting decisions: frequent decisions that require collaboration across teams or functions (e.g., product launches, pricing).
• Delegated decisions: routine, low-risk decisions that should be made quickly by those closest to the work (e.g., hiring, small purchases).

This classification helps prevent bottlenecks by ensuring decisions are made at the right level. For example, delegated decisions should not be escalated to the executive team. Conversely, big bets should be deliberately elevated and given proper attention.

Benefits:

• Prevents over-analysis of routine matters.
• Frees up leadership time for truly strategic issues.
• Creates structure for faster, more effective decisions.

Long-Term Impact:
Over time, organizations that classify decisions build a culture of clarity. Employees know what to escalate and what to decide independently, reducing ambiguity and speeding up the flow of work.

Clarify Accountability with “One Decision, One Owner”

Another common issue in decision making is diffused responsibility. When multiple people feel accountable—or when no one does—decisions stall.

The antidote is simple but powerful: assign one clear decision owner. This does not mean that others are excluded from providing input. It means that, ultimately, one person is accountable for making the call and ensuring it is executed.

Benefits:

• Creates accountability and ownership.
• Speeds up execution by avoiding unnecessary debates.
• Reduces confusion and decision paralysis.

Long-Term Impact:
Embedding this principle across the organization encourages empowerment. It enables managers and teams to move faster without waiting for top-level approval on every detail, while also ensuring senior leaders focus on the most critical choices.

Food for Thought: Balancing Structure with Flexibility

Of course, no solution is without challenges. As you think about applying these approaches, consider:

• How can organizations classify decisions effectively without overcomplicating the process?
• How do leaders balance accountability with collaboration—ensuring diverse input without losing clarity?
• How can businesses avoid pulling decision-making authority back to the top after a mistake?

For a deeper exploration of how structured approaches improve decision making, we recommend our paper on process-oriented decision-making, which outlines the broader benefits of embedding clarity into organizational processes.

Conclusion

Better decision making isn’t about collecting more data or adding more meetings. It’s about bringing clarity and structure into how organizations decide.

By classifying decisions by type and assigning one clear decision owner, businesses can reduce wasted time, improve execution, and boost organizational efficiency.

If your organization struggles with slow or poor-quality decisions, now is the time to act. Reach out to us to discuss how you can implement decision-making frameworks that not only solve today’s challenges but also prepare your business for the future.

FAQ

Why do organizations struggle with decision making despite having more data?

Many organizations struggle because data alone doesn’t solve structural issues. Problems like unclear accountability, organizational complexity, and communication overload slow down decision making and reduce organizational efficiency.

What is the best way to improve decision making in a business?

A proven way is to classify decisions by type—big bets, cross-cutting, and delegated—and to assign a single accountable decision owner. These two steps bring clarity, speed, and efficiency.

How does unclear accountability affect organizational efficiency

When accountability is unclear, decisions are delayed, duplicated, or avoided. This reduces efficiency, increases costs, and lowers employee trust.

What are the benefits of classifying decisions by type?

It ensures decisions are made at the right level, prevents routine decisions from being escalated unnecessarily, and allows leaders to focus on truly strategic choices.

How can organizations balance collaboration with accountability in decision making

Collaboration should inform decisions, not dilute ownership. The key is to collect diverse input but assign one accountable owner who makes the final call.

Can better decision making really improve organizational efficiency?

Yes. Clear, structured decision making reduces wasted time in meetings, speeds up execution, and helps organizations respond faster to change.