Decision Pattern 6: Increase Approvals or Reduce Decision-Makers?

The Phenomenon: “More Checks, Slower Decisions”

As an organization expands, voices naturally increase saying, “Let’s check just to be safe,” “It’s more secure to get approval,” or “We should avoid looking like someone acted alone.” Approval processes gradually multiply as a result. However, the moment they cross a certain threshold, the organization falls into a state where “no one makes decisions, and judgments simply stagnate.” This is not merely a problem of speed; it’s a fundamental issue with the decision-making structure itself.

Management Decision Layer (Why)

The Decision to Increase Approvals is a Decision to “Dilute Responsibility”

The purpose of increasing approval processes is often “security.” The underlying desire is to avoid judgment errors, disperse responsibility, and present a decision made by the organization. However, structurally, the decision to increase approvals has the effect of obscuring “who ultimately decided.” As a result, decisions become committee-based, post-failure analysis becomes impossible, and a state where improvements cannot be made becomes entrenched.

What Happens in an Organization Where Decisions Stall

In organizations with many approvals, the following phenomena occur simultaneously: everyone becomes a “person who doesn’t object,” no one becomes the “person who decided,” and decisions become based on precedent. This is not a problem with the attitude or capability of the frontline staff; it’s a design flaw on the part of the organization that “failed to design decision-makers.”

Not “Reduce Approvals,” but “Reduce Decision-Makers”

The critical juncture here is not whether to increase or decrease approvals. The essential fork in the road is whether to clarify “who decides.” Reducing decision-makers means designing an organization where a single final decision-maker is assigned for each decision theme.

Specialist Implementation Layer (How)

Key Points in Designing to Reduce Decision-Makers

What’s needed to reduce decision-makers is not a complex system. It’s crucial to decide at least the following three points:

• Who makes this decision?
• What is the scope of that person’s authority?
• Under what conditions does the matter revert to a management-level decision?

If these are clear, approvals can be kept to a minimum.

Cases Where an Approval Process is Necessary

Of course, not all approvals are bad. For decisions involving large sums of money (e.g., over ~$50,000), high risk, or organization-wide impact, approvals function as “guidelines for judgment.” The problem arises when approvals become a “mechanism for ensuring no one decides.”

Common Misconceptions

Misconception ①: Increasing Approvals Reduces Mistakes

Increasing approvals does not automatically improve decision quality. On the contrary, it often leads to a state where no one thinks deeply and only looks at precedent.

Misconception ②: Having One Decision-Maker Leads to Dictatorship

Whether it becomes a dictatorship is determined not by the number of people but by the process design: “Are the decision criteria shared?” and “Is verification and correction possible?”

Final Questions to Check with This Decision

Regarding your organization’s management decisions and operational processes, can you answer the following questions?

• Who is ultimately making this decision?
• If it fails, whose decision can be analyzed?
• Is the approval process aiding the decision, or is it stopping it?

If you cannot answer these, the structure may be skewed towards increasing approvals.

Summary (No Single Correct Answer)

Increasing approvals dilutes responsibility, while reducing decision-makers enables verification. The problem lies not in the number of people but in the decision-making structure. Organizations with slow decisions have failed to design the “decision-makers” themselves, who can produce reversible decisions (capable of verification and correction). This is the core reason why delegation of authority often fails in the management decisions of small and medium-sized enterprises.