This post is inspired by a reader who writes,
“I believe that leaders make decision not based on what is right or wrong but what is relevant in the context.”
Most leadership decisions are about good, better, and best, not right and wrong. They aren’t moral.
Moral decisions aren’t compromised. Options,
on the other hand, are explored and modified.
Treating non-moral decisions like moral – right or wrong – choices, establishes adversarial relationships. Church people do this when they fight over methods, programs, or the color of the church’s front door.
Treating options like moral decisions makes
you look like an out-of-balance fool. Chill out!
Options have a good, better, or best. Explore, explain, and lobby for the option you think is best. Give reasons and data. Then make a choice.
Don’t be offended, but non-moral
choices can always be improved.
Passionate implementation, not second guessing, follows decisions. Grab an oar and row. But, you ask, “What if I disagree? Get over it or get out.
One of the hardest leadership challenges is dealing with good people who drag their feet. Detractors and foot draggers always harm organizations. Get them fully on board or eliminate them.
Encourage passionate debate before choices are made; after, call for passionate loyalty.
Implementation is followed by evaluation. Evaluation isn’t second guessing; it’s the pursuit of good, better, or best.
Evaluation isn’t, “I wish we would have, or, I told you so.” It’s, “How do we improve?” Saying, “Should have,” doesn’t sit well with those who are giving their best.
Cowards stand in the shadows second guessing. On the other hand, committed leaders say, “Here’s where we are, how can we improve?”
There are many solutions to complex problems.
Have you seen leaders who made decisions as if they were moral choices? What happens?
How are options best explored?