If organizations make decisions on the basis of what others will do, say, react (violently) against them for making those decisions, these leaders should be vacate their positions.
For one thing, their decisions should be based on facts and observable evidence. Their decisions should be guided by a rationale and logical criteria or a set of guidelines that the organizations should abide by as part of their mandate, terms of reference and business strategy.
To discuss the risks involved in decision-making, it is all about probability and impact. The probability that their constituency will be irate and will tear their door and /or the decision will cause havoc in the community should be taken in proportion. Who are these people, how serious will the impact of this decision be?
To hide under the guise that people will see this as partiality, special treatment, or favoritism is nonsense. Open your meetings, create guidelines, stick to your mandate, and weigh risks objectively, not as something to be afraid of rather than to determine if its actually an issue.
If you see ghosts everywhere, you might not want to get out of house or your room. It's the same thing as those leaders who cant and wont make a positive decision because they see things that do no exist.
Fear-based decision-making is the worst of all. The default is always a No.
If this article resonates with you, please share this with your colleagues and networks. You can also subscribe to our monthly newsletter to be the first to know of resources available for you. Contact us to resolve your challenges.