How To Be Collaborative And Decisive At The Same Time
If everyone on your team agrees with you, what do you need them for?
Seriously. Think about that for a second.
You hired smart people precisely because they see things you don't. Because they'll challenge your assumptions. Because their perspectives make your decisions better.
But here's what's wild: most leaders say they want dissent, then accidentally punish it the moment someone actually disagrees.
Or worse, they invite input, get flooded with conflicting opinions, and then freeze. Paralyzed by the weight of all those smart voices saying different things.
So they end up in this impossible middle ground: not decisive enough to move fast, not collaborative enough to harness the team's intelligence.
The meeting stretches to two hours. Everyone leaves confused about what was actually decided. And you're stuck wondering if being a good leader means endless debate or just making the call.
Here's the thing most people get wrong…
The problem isn't choosing between inviting dissent and being decisive.
The problem is not being clear about how the decision actually gets made.
Once you fix that? Everything changes.
Let me show you how.
The Missing Agreement
Most teams don't actually have a clear agreement around how decisions get made.
They just sort of discuss things for a while, try to get everyone on the same page, and hope clarity emerges. What usually happens instead is people keep repeating their opinions because they think they need to convince everyone in the room.
Here's what changes everything: clarity about the decision rule (how the decision gets made).
In most leadership contexts, the intended decision rule is "leader decides with input." You're gathering perspectives so you can make an informed choice. But if your team doesn't know that's what's happening, they'll think it's a consensus decision and keep lobbying for their position.
The fix is almost embarrassingly simple.
At the start of the conversation, say: "I really want to hear your thoughts on this. We'll talk for 20 minutes, and then based on all your input, I'm going to decide."
That one sentence settles people. Now they just need you to hear them and not necessarily get everyone to agree with them.
The Three Keys to Inviting Dissent
1. Ask for it explicitly
"What doesn't make sense about this? What's wrong with my thinking here? Why might this not work?"
When you're too attached to being right, you get defensive. But when you let go of sourcing your worthiness from having the answers, you can be genuinely open-minded and curious about other perspectives.
2. Make it safe to disagree
The most important moment isn't when you ask for dissent, it's what happens when someone gives it to you.
If you drill into them or get defensive, you've just taught everyone: This was a trap. Never do that again.
Instead: "Thank you so much for bringing that up. I hadn't thought of that."
You get more of what you appreciate (“what you appreciate appreciates”). If you want people speaking up, appreciate when they take the risk.
3. Practice conscious listening
This is where most leaders lose the game. They ask for input, then don't actually demonstrate they've heard it.
Conscious listening means listening from your head (what are they saying?), your heart (what are they feeling?), and your gut (what do they want?).
Repeat it back: "Okay, I hear you saying we should do this because of X and you feel Y and really want Z. Is that right?"
When people feel genuinely heard, they can disagree with your decision and still commit to executing it. When they don't feel heard, they won't fully commit because they're still unsettled that you didn't really get their point.
What Decisiveness Actually Requires
Decisiveness isn't the absence of doubt. It's feeling the doubt and deciding anyway.
I notice this even in small moments. Like when I'm leading a retreat and deciding which exercise to do next. Part of me wants certainty that it's the "right" choice. But that certainty doesn't exist.
The role of a leader is to decide in the face of uncertainty, which means deciding in the face of fear.
Here's what helps:
Trust your intuition, not just your intellect. Instead of asking clients: "What do you think is the right answer?" I ask: "What feels right to you?" Those are usually different answers. I've found the feeling is more reliable than the thinking.
Remember that hard decisions often don't matter as much as you think. If one option was obviously better, it would be obvious. Hard decisions are hard because either choice could be great. The real risk is staying stuck.
Recognize this is just an experiment. You're making a choice to see what happens. If it doesn't work, you'll learn and adjust. Most decisions aren't irreversible.
When your team is divided and you're divided, sometimes the answer is just: choose. Flip a coin if you have to, then notice how you feel about the result. That's useful data.
The Answer Is Both
So it all comes down to these two things working together.
First, the agreement. Get clear on how decisions get made. Tell your team: "I want your input, we'll discuss for 20 minutes, then I'm deciding." That one clarity stops the endless loop and allows you to invite dissent.
Second, your capacity to be with fear. Because even with clear agreements, you'll still feel scared. Scared you're choosing wrong. Scared you're disappointing people. Scared you don't actually know what you're doing.
That fear doesn't go away. The question is: can you decide anyway?
Most leaders think indecision is a thinking problem. It's not. It's a feeling problem. You're waiting for certainty that will never come because you don't want to feel the fear of being wrong.
But the role of a leader is to decide in the face of uncertainty, which means deciding in the face of fear.
Confidence isn't the absence of doubt. It's feeling the doubt and doing it anyway.
Your team doesn't need you to have all the answers. They need to feel heard, and they need you to decide.
Everything else follows from that.
With love,
