Streamline Decisions by Involving Only Essential Personnel
TL;DR
- Streamlining decisions by involving only essential personnel prevents excessive meeting time, freeing up staff capacity and accelerating project completion compared to broader inclusion.
- Involving more people in decisions, even with good intentions, can increase total staff hours by 2.5 times without a proportional increase in decision quality.
- Limiting decision-making to individuals with relevant knowledge and interest, rather than broad consensus, accelerates execution and respects diverse time commitments.
- Publishing decision-making team members allows broader input without direct involvement, managing diverse perspectives effectively like a quartet versus a large chorus.
- Misplaced accountability meetings, intended to track progress, consume valuable time that could be used for actual decision-making and execution.
Deep Dive
The discussion begins with a personal anecdote from Shaquille O'Neal regarding his struggle with moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), highlighting that many adults with obesity also experience this condition. He describes the symptoms, such as breathing interruptions, loud snoring, choking, and daytime fatigue, and encourages listeners to learn more at don'tsleeponosa.com, noting this information is provided by Lilly, a medicine company.
Welcome to the Before Breakfast podcast. The primary tip offered is to streamline decision-making by involving only the necessary individuals. The source argues that by identifying who truly needs to be part of a decision and trusting them to make it, the process can be significantly faster, avoiding delays caused by including people who lack the time, interest, or relevant insights, and preventing meetings from consuming excessive work hours.
The source observes that a considerable amount of time at work is spent in meetings, sometimes all day, back to back. While this might be justified for organizational leaders making all final decisions, the podcast suggests that many meetings are not structured this way. Some meetings are identified as misplaced methods of accountability, serving to track project progress amidst other tasks. However, many others are intended for decision-making but become inefficient due to the over-inclusion of participants.
The podcast acknowledges the appeal of inclusive cultures and the potential benefits of diverse perspectives in decision-making, as varied viewpoints can help uncover blind spots. Nevertheless, it asserts that not everyone needs to be involved in every decision. The source advocates for streamlining decisions by involving only those who have a genuine understanding of and investment in the matter at hand.
Illustrative examples are provided for personal life, such as selecting a new television where only those who watch it extensively need to weigh in on price and size, or choosing music lessons where a musically inclined spouse might select teachers or camps, with the other spouse simply executing the informed decision. Similarly, for work events, a boss might only want to approve a catering decision within budget rather than be involved in selecting the menu.
The source then addresses situations where a broad range of voices is genuinely necessary, but emphasizes that it is not practical to include everyone who cares about the decision. In such cases, the podcast suggests representing diverse perspectives without inviting every single person, likening this to a quartet rather than a 60-person chorus. For instance, when revising a company's annual review process, an advisory group should include people from various departments and backgrounds, but not everyone who has an interest.
The podcast quantifies the inefficiency of over-inclusion, positing that a six-person team spending 20 hours on a project results in 120 person-hours. However, a 12-person team tackling the same project might take 25 hours due to the need to listen to everyone and the ensuing interactions, accumulating 300 person-hours, a 2.5-fold increase in staff capacity. The source questions whether the ultimate decision would be 2.5 times better, concluding that it is more effective to thoughtfully select the smallest reasonable team and then trust their judgment.
To address concerns about exclusion, the source suggests publishing the list of team members so others can share ideas or concerns with them directly, rather than involving everyone in the decision-making process itself, which the source states would cause all gears to grind to a halt. The podcast concludes by reiterating that when a decision needs to be made, one should identify who possesses the necessary knowledge and insight, and who is interested, and exclude everyone else to ensure progress.
The podcast concludes with a thank you from Laura for listening and a wish to make the most of our time. Listeners are invited to reach out with questions, ideas, or feedback at Laura@lauravandercam.com. Before Breakfast is a production of iHeart Media, and more podcasts from iHeart Media can be found on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever listeners find their favorite shows.
A final segment reiterates the message about Shaquille O'Neal and obstructive sleep apnea, with the same details as the initial mention, again directing listeners to don'tsleeponosa.com and noting the information is provided by Lilly, a medicine company.
The episode also includes a promotional message for National University, highlighting its flexible online formats, four and eight-week courses, and monthly class starts as ways for prospective students to fit education into their schedules, allowing them to begin sooner, finish faster, and manage work, family, and school. Listeners are encouraged to learn more at NU.edu. This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human.
Action Items
- Design decision-making process: Involve only essential personnel to streamline outcomes and reduce meeting overhead.
- Create team charter: Define roles and decision authority for advisory groups to prevent unwieldy participation.
- Audit meeting invitations: Identify and remove non-essential attendees from 3-5 recurring project meetings.
- Implement feedback channel: Establish a process for non-attendees to submit ideas to decision-making teams.
Key Quotes
"As I have studied how people spend their time at work, I am continually amazed at how much time is consumed by meetings. People can literally be in meetings all day long, back to back."
Laura observes that a significant amount of work time is spent in meetings, often to the point of occupying an entire day. This highlights a potential inefficiency in how work is structured and how decisions are made within organizations.
"But these are meandering and ineffective because way more people are involved than need to be."
Laura points out that meetings intended for decision-making can become unproductive when too many individuals participate. This suggests that the scope of involvement in decision-making processes is a critical factor in their effectiveness.
"Instead, it is often wise to streamline decisions and only involve the people who really know and care about it."
Laura advocates for a more focused approach to decision-making by limiting participation to those with direct knowledge and investment in the outcome. This principle emphasizes efficiency and expertise over broad inclusion for every decision.
"Imagine a quartet with a soprano, an alto, a tenor, and a bass. Not a 60-person chorus."
Laura uses this analogy to illustrate that effective representation in decision-making does not require mass participation. A small, diverse group, like a quartet, can achieve a harmonious and effective outcome, contrasting with an unwieldy large chorus.
"If a six-person team spends 20 hours on the project, that is 120 person hours. But if a 12-person team tackles the project, it will probably take longer. Perhaps 25 hours, since you have to listen to everyone."
Laura presents a mathematical example to demonstrate the inefficiency of larger teams in decision-making projects. She shows how doubling the team size can more than double the total person-hours required, indicating a significant drop in productivity per person.
"When there is a decision to be made, determine who has the knowledge and insight needed to make a good decision. And who is interested in the decision. And leave everyone else out of it."
Laura concludes by advising a clear process for identifying key decision-makers based on their knowledge and interest. She stresses that excluding those not essential to the decision is crucial for efficient execution.
Resources
External Resources
Websites & Online Resources
- omnystudio.com/listener - Mentioned for privacy information.
- don'tsleeponosa.com - Referenced for learning more about obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).
- iHeart Radio - Mentioned as a platform for finding podcasts.
- NU.edu - Referenced for learning more about National University's educational offerings.
Podcasts & Audio
- Before Breakfast - The podcast series featuring the episode.
- Guaranteed Human - Mentioned as a descriptor for the podcast.
Other Resources
- Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) - Discussed as a health condition affecting adults with obesity.