Posts

,

How to Manage Better With Tactical Decision-Making

Hear the phrase “tactical decision-making” and your first instinct is probably to frame it in terms of its strategic counterpart. This is not an article about strategy, but there is an important habit we need to bring with us from setting strategy when we think about tactics: thinking. No one reading this would let strategy decide itself or claim that strategy emerges from reacting to crises. Management by exception has its place, but it won’t set your strategy for you. Neither, more to the point, is it appropriate to let our reflexive reactions to events dictate our tactics.

What Is Tactical Decision-Making?

Put simply, tactical decision-making is thinking through your day-to-day operations, with an emphasis on taking responsibility and control over improving the way you and your team get things done.

Tactical decision-making is easier to understand in terms of what it is not. If you are running on autopilot, spectating your metrics, or responding reflexively to events, you are not engaging in tactical decision-making.

Running on Autopilot

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds …” -Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Running on autopilot” is doing what you did because it is what you have done. Maybe you looked at your metrics first, or you see that your customers and team are happy, or perhaps you’ve thought through what you’re doing extremely well, and that’s why it works. But nothing works the same way forever. And was it not tactical decision-making that led you to such a smooth-running operation in the first place?

Responding Reflexively to Events

We must respond to events, but if we’re letting events dictate our reactions, repetition will turn those reactions into policy. When we find ourselves reacting to the same crises, know that we are creating policy whether we think it through or not. A leader sets policy with intention; a follower is led into policy unaware.

“Fear is the mind-killer.” -Frank Herbert, Dune

Nothing sets the reflexes in gear and the mind in neutral like fear. Despite the note of urgency of the metaphor of putting out fires, most leadership crises aren’t so critical that we can’t afford to think before we act. One way to create some space is not to fight the fear but embrace it as problem-solving urgency. When you feel that pit opening in your gut, stop. Take a moment to absorb the situation. Consider your options, pick one, and then proceed. If your “fight or flight” response is set to “fight” and the way you fight is to “solve,” you’ve set yourself up for problem-solving over panic.

It also helps to try to anticipate time-constrained problems before they arise. Of course, no one can predict everything. The best we can do is learn from experience and never be taken by surprise twice.

Take your leadership to the next level

Upgrade your leadership skills with our online courses.

A Spectator to Your Metrics

You’re close to tactical decision-making, but you’re not quite there. You’re looking at your financials, tracking your project’s critical path, and checking your metrics. You’re keeping track of your progress, whatever form that takes. Fantastic! How are you acting on those metrics? Running on autopilot? Reacting reflexively? Or are you really using your tools to make good decisions?

Tactical Decision-Making

You have the metrics and the mindfulness to actively choose to make or remake operational decisions. You’re looking at your processes, policies, and methods and asking yourself, “How can I make this better?” You’re thinking and acting, not responding reflexively. This is tactical decision-making.

Balance: Management by Exception vs. Tactical Decision-Making

We have many duties as leaders, and no advice we take or method we employ should ever draw us away from keeping our responsibilities balanced. Tactical decision-making should never be a reason not to give prompt attention to immediate needs and emerging problems.

When Tactical Decision-Making Is an Excuse

Everyone has worked with — or worse, for — a Laputan so wrapped up in abstract ideas you can count on this person to do no actual work. Such a person might even hijack a meeting to discuss a concept in uselessly abstract terms or quibble over issues not related to the work at hand. The Laputan will also talk a lot about “vision,” “strategy,” and perhaps even “tactical decision-making.”

Obviously, a good leader has to dig in and do the work. A good leader must respond promptly to crises, particularly those involving customers or legal affairs. A good leader needs to be in the moment when the situation demands it. “Don’t bother me; I’m thinking,” isn’t an acceptable excuse when you are needed. When we lead a meeting, we need to justify every minute we hold the floor to justify the time cost for every person there, including ourselves.

When Management by Exception Is an Excuse

The customer walks away happy, the dispute between the employees dissolves before your wisdom, the blockage in the production line bursts open at your command, and you feel pretty good about that. “I’m doing a great job!”

Yes, you did a great job and have every right to feel proud. But you’re a leader, and a leader has many responsibilities. If we never think about tactical decision-making, if we never think about underlying processes, some of which might well be contributing to the fires we’re constantly putting out, we are neglecting one of our duties as a leader. It costs us time, but intelligently addressing the cause of a problem saves us the time of repeatedly solving that problem.

Conclusion

Tactical decision-making is as important as responding promptly to the immediate challenges of our leadership environment. A wise leader understands and carries the burdens of both planning and execution. Find the right balance between responding to events as a leader and taking time to think through the day-to-day work processes so that “emergencies” and “exceptions” become fewer as our plans for dealing with them become better.

The Eighth Mile offers an online leadership training course to help find balance and think and act like a leader. Get in touch to find out how to can improve decision-making processes.

/0 Comments/by
,

The FASD Method: Improved Decision-Making at Work

Adults make over 35,000 decisions each day. Many of the choices you make are automatic and proceed without much conscious consideration, such as getting out of bed or the route you take to the office. Other decisions carry more weight and require additional time and thought before making a judgment. But what about making decisions at work? Do you have a decision-making method to determine the right course of action?

Most of us have never been formally coached on how to make important decisions. If you’ve had difficulty making decisions at work, or if the calls you’ve been making are resulting in undesired outcomes, there might be something wrong. Not necessarily with the decisions themselves, but with how you are making them.

What if you took a more methodical approach to decision-making? Decision-making methods do exist. In fact, the military wouldn’t be able to function without a system for making rational decisions we call the FASD method. Could implementing a similar decision-making method at work help you develop and hone your decision-making skills?

Take your leadership to the next level

Upgrade your leadership skills with our online courses.

What Is the FASD Decision-Making Method?

The FASD approach is a military decision-making method that provides a framework for making informed decisions. This method guides choice-making with a systematic approach. To use this method for making decisions at work, you first determine the possible courses of action. Next, measure each of the options against the four FASD principles:

  1. Feasibility

  2. Acceptability

  3. Sustainability

  4. Discernibility

Both the Australian and American military use a variation of these terms in their decision-making methods. Let’s cover each one.

Feasible

Is the course of action feasible? Meaning can it be done within any restrictions you may have, including physical limitations, access to resources, and so on? Consider the amount of time required, the location, and the manpower needed.

For a simple example, let’s say your company’s fax machine has broken, and you are trying to choose whether to repair it or replace it. Is one option more financially feasible than the other? Do you have the staffing capacity to spend time comparing and testing new models? What about physical space–would a new machine take up more room, and can dedicate the square footage to this piece of equipment?

If it passes the feasibility test, you can move on to the next parameter.

Acceptable

Take the time to do a risk assessment. If a given option plays out as you expect it to, what are the consequences? Define the risks and determine if they are more detrimental than doing nothing. Balance the cost of this choice, which includes the risk involved in relation to the potential gain.

Continuing with the broken fax machine example, are the consequences of replacing vs. repairing the fax machine acceptable? If you replace it, the cost will be more significant, but repairing it may only buy time until another breakdown. Which option is more acceptable to you?

Sustainable (or Suitable)

In other words, are you capable of following through with this decision and maintaining the outcome on a long-term basis? Also, take a look at suitability — does the end result effectively resolve the problem you set out to solve with this decision-making method?

Referring back to our example, will the company be able to absorb the cost of replacing the fax machine, or will it do irreparable harm to the budget? Or, if you repair it, how long will it last until it breaks down again, thus incurring another cost?

Discernible

Lastly, look at whether each course of action is discernible. If the options you have identified at the beginning are not significantly different from each other, then you aren’t really making a decision — or rather, you’ve already made the decision, and who knows if it was the right one? If this is the case, return to the beginning of the process and redefine your potential courses of action, making sure each one solves the initial problem through a distinct and differing result.

In this case, our example problem of replacing vs. repairing broken equipment might have the same outcome if all other factors, such as cost and downtime, are the same. If that’s the situation, you should consider what problem you are really trying to solve. Is your end goal to send faxes? Or is it simply that you need a secure way of sending documents to clients? Are there other ways of accomplishing that goal other than a fax machine? Can you pivot to electronic signatures via an online platform or email? Or would you benefit from in-person meetings to go over these documents? Now, instead of tying yourself to a “choice” where you ultimately up in the same place no matter which option you choose (still using a fax machine), you have three truly unique options to choose from (fax machine, electronic sending, or in-person meetings).

From there, you can take the options that have passed the FASD criteria and conduct a course of action analysis to make a better and more informed decision at work.

Why the FASD Method Is Better Than Most Decision-Making Methods

The FASD decision-making method gives decision-makers the steps to complete a thorough assessment and review before making critical calls. This approach to decision-making is better than most others for various reasons. To understand this, let’s take a quick look at some other common ways decisions are made.

Common Alternatives to the FASD Decision-Making Method

Some of the common decision-making methods used to make decisions at work today include:

  • Commanding: Making decisions on your own without outside input

  • Consulting: Considering input from a small group of peers to make a decision

  • Voting: A group consensus where the majority rules

Each of the above methods fails to include one crucial step that the FASD masters: setting up the game properly. To make truly informed decisions as a leader in business, you first need to develop feasible options to compare. Each option has to be able to stand on its own merit and be entirely different (not just a slight deviation from the same plan).

The FASD method ensures that you’re choosing from the right set of choices. Assessing each course of action against the four principles above provides clarity in two ways. First, it acts as screening criteria to ensure each option is thoroughly considered. This prevents proceeding with a decision that fails to meet one of the FASD principles. Second, it enhances problem-solving abilities by requiring a thorough understanding of the situation before making any rash decisions to solve the problem.

When you adopt the FASD decision-making method, you can find your true power as a leader by adopting a military-like approach to your business. Doing a thorough review of your options before you choose one removes subjectivity and impulsive conclusions from your process, thereby earning you more respect from your team.

Take Your Decision-Making Method to the Next Level

Learning the right methods for how to make decisions at work can be a daunting task. If you feel this way, you are not alone. Luckily, there is help. At The Eighth Mile Consulting, our goal is to work with good people looking to improve themselves as employers and leaders.

If you’re looking for lessons that will take your leadership to the next level, take a look at our 8-week online leadership course to see if it might help you make better decisions at work and become a better leader for your team.

Contact Us

Reach out to the team to book a consult.

/2 Comments/by