(Re-)reading Shakespeare

Reflections on what drives decision-making.

Opinions on the matter differ significantly, with some asserting that “nobody is making decisions anymore,” while others argue that “(their) only job is to make decisions and arbitrate trade-offs incessantly.”

Your stand in this discussion may be an indication of seniority, but it is also a sign that the quest for productivity is constantly redefining decision-making.

Indeed, performance targets are ever more stringent, and decision-making processes are ever more complex. Yet, this is hardly news. Just as peer pressure, path dependence, or other well-documented cognitive biases, including the HIPPO syndrome (whereby the Highest Income Paid Person’s Opinion matters most), these factors have persisted over a considerable span of time.

What’s fascinating is that decision-making still takes as much time as it did 100 years ago, from a few hours to months, contradicting a common belief that looks at decisions as mere switches, easily toggled on or off. And just as in years past, it is still rare to see all constituencies satisfied with that ultimate decision.

“How can leaders make better decisions?” asked the Mouse.

When management struggles, literature can help.

In his world-famous ‘to be or not to be’ monologue, Hamlet invites us to witness his decision-making process. By pondering this existential question, Shakespeare’s lead character conveys that one cannot disconnect the practical implications of decisions from the moral considerations, reflecting one’s personal value system.

However, as much as organisations like to focus on the what (Problem to solve), the where (Performance to achieve), and the why (Purpose), it may be the how that matters the most.

Succumbing to the charm of accessible frameworks (what we call the ‘4Ps’), the ‘Process’ is often underrated. It is also the most dynamic and challenging aspect of decision-making.

Indeed, what keeps Hamlet awake is not the definition of the problem at stake, what success means in addressing it, or even his ability to do so. Hamlet’s stream of consciousness reflects his relation to uncertainty, considering three drivers:

• Norms: what is acceptable?

• Alterity: how will others react?

• Time: what will the consequences be?

Leaders could reflect on what those questions mean to them and whether they look at them from a place of fragility (under high stress, for instance):

• What will others think?

• What will others do?

• What will happen to me?

Or from a place of vulnerability:

• What makes me uncomfortable and why?

• What invitation am I extending to others, and what does it mean to them?

• What does the decision mean in the bigger picture, and is it aligned with my beliefs?

At the end of the monologue, Hamlet invites us to consider whether “conscience doth make cowards of us all.” By pitting efficiency against consciousness, Hamlet reminds us that someone is constantly judging us and that judgement is also the reflection of our worldview.

Depending on whether one prioritises the efficiency or the legitimacy of the decision-making process, a continuous flow of thoughts can be perceived as either inefficient or wise.

Not everyone is Hamlet. But when it comes to our own kingdom, our ability to reframe the circumstances in which we make decisions to give them meaning is a sure sign of agency. It is also a humbling process that can inform one’s relation to risk and uncertainty.

Taking risks is not necessarily reckless. It conveys trust in our environment (norms), our community (alterity), and ourselves (time). As such, trust is inherently influenced by our conscious or subconscious worldview, just as decision-making is influenced by our guiding doctrine, whether explicitly stated or implicitly followed.

Those who no longer think they are making decisions, and those who see themselves as serial decision-makers, could reflect on both their view of the world and the doctrine they are encouraged to embrace. They will come to realise that their agency originates not from seniority alone, but from the harmonisation of those two concepts – the alignment of personal affiliations with the values upheld by the company.

As for their answer to Hamlet’s questions, let’s just say: to each their own.

The End is Shakespearian, anyway.

Baptiste Raymond - 06/2023.