2016 Letter to Shareholders

amazon.com

4 points·wallflower··5 comments

>Third, use the phrase “disagree and commit.” This phrase will save a lot of time. If you have conviction on a particular direction even though there’s no consensus, it’s helpful to say, “Look, I know we disagree on this but will you gamble with me on it? Disagree and commit?” By the time you’re at this point, no one can know the answer for sure, and you’ll probably get a quick yes.

This sounds really powerful but also like it might be open to abuse. Does anyone use something similar in their own workplace?

Not worded this way, but the idea of commitment is valued more heavily then unanimous decisions at my work. In particular, we follow that puts commitment right after conflict, agreement isn't necessary.

I don't think this is abused because it's up to all parties to give their commitment. I can't give your commitment if you disagree, only you can.

A lot of good stuff, I especially liked points about high-velocity decision making:

"Many decisions are reversible, two-way doors. Those decisions can use a light-weight process."

"most decisions should probably be made with somewhere around 70% of the information you wish you had. If you wait for 90%, in most cases, you’re probably being slow."

"use the phrase “disagree and commit.”" ... It’s a genuine disagreement of opinion, a candid expression of my view, a chance for the team to weigh my view, and a quick, sincere commitment to go their way."

That 70% idea comes from Colin Powell I believe. Of course it probably isn't his originally. http://govleaders.org/powell.htm

Good read. I thought this was sort of paradoxical though:

"First, never use a one-size-fits-all decision-making process."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com