1, you need to tell us your real thoughts.
2, allow everyone to discuss, discuss this matter, we must have an inclusive heart, can accommodate those different voices.
3. Listen to the final decision given by the most authoritative person in the team, or decide the final decision according to the result of democratic voting.
4. After deciding what to do, you must land.
At the same time, I think there are two conditions to achieve the optimal decision, or to better eliminate some other downside risks in the process.
1, most people consider this issue for the public interest.
2. After making a decision, a few people who disagree should stick to the decision-making line.
These two points test team leaders' understanding of human nature and control of team direction. If you can reach such a position, you should be much better than many ordinary employees. This may also involve the issue of team trust, so I won't say much here. After all, the central purpose of many teams is very clear now, even if there are some deviations in some small details, the overall goal will not change. If the general direction is good, there will be less deviation.
Now look back at the previous points.
You need to say what you really think.
At the beginning of the discussion, we should let everyone speak freely. Express your thoughts truly. I think the first criterion of the test is to say whatever you want. The second criterion of the test is that what is said in the discussion must be said on the desktop. If something can't be known to everyone here, then this statement is not on the table. In that case, it goes without saying.
As for personal decision-making, I think I am a stupid person, and I can only write down my different voices when making decisions. Now let's start my inner discussion on draft paper. Be sure to dare to write down every thought in your heart.
B, allow everyone to discuss and discuss this matter, and we must have an inclusive heart that can accommodate those different voices.
For one or more decisions to be discussed, we should follow Chairman Mao's words, "Let people talk, the sky will not fall, if they have words, let them fart, smell good, and let the masses discuss."
We must have a heated discussion, at least at the discussion level, and use all the arguments or oral simulations to achieve a pre-deduction purpose.
Moreover, both leaders and individuals involved in the discussion need to have a basic tolerance. In fact, this is still so difficult to achieve. It is a good quality to be able to let others speak while retaining their own opinions. At least in my opinion, it is very difficult to make people talk in the workplace. The most rare thing is to make people talk, but also to accept their completely different views and change in the general direction. This is very difficult.
If everyone is not allowed to speak in the initial discussion, it is a signal of organizational danger. No matter whether it is formal or informal discussion, once there is nothing to say, the "violent communication mode" is completely started.
C. Listen to the final decision given by the most authoritative person in the team, or decide the final decision according to the result of democratic voting.
The authority to make decisions in a team is not blind worship of authority. Many times the discussion will not reach a certain balance, and the most authoritative person will play a decisive role in most cases.
Of course, here, I still want to talk about the above points. An authoritative person must be able to listen to those very opposing voices when making decisions. Even if this voice can't change his own decision, I still believe that this different voice may be a whistle to avoid some risks.
D, after deciding what to do, you must land.
The decision not to land is meaningless.
As for how or what to do. It depends on the situation at that time. I just want to remind myself that if you are in charge of this decision, you should always follow up the nodes that implement it. If you need to make a decision again during the landing, repeat the first three points.