Build Decision Muscle Before You Need It

One of the first things that breaks under pressure is decision-making.

Not because leaders suddenly become indecisive. But because, under uncertainty, every decision starts to feel heavier than it really is.

I see this pattern repeatedly where decisions slow down. More people start to get involved. crises panel meetings multiply. The system tells itself it is being careful, when in reality it is becoming fragile.

Resilient organisations do something different. They treat decision making as a capability that needs practice long before pressure forces the issue.

A familiar pattern from a huge engineering program

Think about an engineering organisation designing a new car over several years.

Early in the program, teams are trusted to explore. Designers test options. Engineers make local trade offs. Decisions are taken close to the work and refined as learning happens.

Agile ways of working help and PI planning creates alignment. Teams leave with clarity and ownership.

Then the plot thickens and pressure builds, timelines tighten, Costs rise, dependencies become more visible. External scrutiny increases.

Suddenly, decisions that used to sit with teams start moving upward. More reviews. More sign offs. More escalation.

From the outside, it still looks Agile. PI planning still happens. Ceremonies still run.

But something important has changed.

Teams stop making small decisions. Risks wait for steering groups. Engineers optimise for safety rather than progress.

Decision making has stopped being a muscle and started being a stress response.

Where Agile and SAFe either help or quietly fail

Agile and SAFe already contain mechanisms to build resilience. But only if they are used as intended.

PI planning is not meant to centralise control. It is meant to create shared clarity so teams can decide independently within clear boundaries.

Under pressure, many organizations reverse this. Plans become commitments rather than hypotheses. Alignment becomes permission. Teams leave planning aligned, but constrained.

This is not a failure of the framework. It is a failure to practice decision making under uncertainty.

What resilient organisations do instead

Resilient organisations deliberately practice decision making when the stakes are still manageable.

They separate decisions into two types.

Some decisions are genuinely hard to reverse. These deserve time and senior attention.

Most decisions are reversible. They can be adjusted, learned from, or undone.

In resilient systems, leaders push reversible decisions down and make them fast. Teams experience that movement is safer than waiting. Leaders learn that letting go of certainty does not mean losing control.

In the car designing program example, this shows up as leaders being explicit about boundaries.

These interfaces are fixed. These safety constraints are real. Within that, the team decides.

Decision muscle gets built through repetition, not intention.

Why this builds resilience

When teams are used to deciding before pressure peaks, they do not freeze when uncertainty increases.

They already know how to move. Leaders already know they do not need to intervene to stay safe.

Decision making becomes a capability the system can rely on, not a bottleneck it fears.

Resilience grows when people trust that action will not automatically lead to blame.

Top Tip: Reduce Control Before Stress Forces It

When every decision feels risky, leaders instinctively tighten control.

Instead, choose one category of decisions and explicitly make them reversible. Say it out loud. Name where teams can decide and move without escalation.

Make this explicit in planning, in PI events, and in day to day work.

This small shift builds decision confidence before pressure arrives. When uncertainty increases, the system already knows how to move without freezing.