A team decision-making model is a clear case of absolutely no absolutes. Every team must make decisions, but the process shifts according to circumstances and group dynamics. As a leader, you have to be sensitive. Balance the needs of individual team members to feel respected and important against the need of the group to get things done. There are a few general categories of decision-making to consider.

Authoritarian

Pure authoritarian decision-making can have its place. For example, if there is an emergency, you don't want a consensus approach to keep running while the chance to take action has passed. But this approach should only be used in emergencies. If it's used too often, you lose the insight that others with different experiences and knowledge can provide. It can also make people distrust you and decide that if they are just to be following orders, there is no reason to do more than punch the clock. Good employees will eventually look elsewhere for employment, and volunteers are certain to have something better to do.

Consulting

In consulting, team members get to make suggestions, but they don't necessarily have a say in the decision. This can be useful when working with group members when you want to retain the ability to drive decisions.

Democratic

Coming from a democratic society, you might think this would be the natural answer to the question of how to make decisions, but it's not. Democracy gives everyone a say, and depending on how the vote comes out, one thing or another will get the nod. But democracy can divide your team into opposing camps that make working together difficult, if not impossible. Yet there are times, particularly in questions of how the team will best operate, that you want everyone's views expressed. If the issue isn't divisive and full support of the team isn't critical, then it can make things move along relatively quickly.

Consensus

Another possibility for those times when everyone has a significant stake in the outcome is to look at consensus decision-making. In this, everyone has to buy into a decision. It's a slow process, marked by the need to facilitate discussion to reach a common understanding and to get people to be willing to say what is really on their minds. When the decision is done, though, you have real buy-in from all parties because it's a decision they all had to agree with. Save this method for decisions that materially affect the team's direction and mission.

Choose the Right Model

So which model will you use? As in all realistic answers, it depends. In this case, the following questions are the ones to ask:

• Where is the team is in its development?

• What is the nature of the issue?

• How urgent is the situation?

• Is there a benefit to the team in greater participation?

• Will greater participation help or hinder the issue's resolution?

• Is there a weakness in your leadership style that a given choice can help you address?

Depending on the answers, you might find that the situation calls for one technique over another.

If the differences are immaterial in this case, then we suggest always defaulting to the most inclusive and participatory technique that will work. The challenge in learning to become a leader is learning to work with others. Presumably, you already know how to get along with yourself and your own decisions. The more you can develop relationships with your team, where their views and experience matter (because they can bring the synergy you seek), the better a leader you can become.