Journey.

'Some journeys are direct, and some are circuitous; some are heroic, and some are fearful and muddled. But every journey, honestly undertaken, stands a chance of taking us toward the place where our deep gladness meets the world's deep need.'

- Parker Palmer

Translated into Widget Thinking:

Do what makes me glad - Weekend Widget.

Find someone who needs my Weekend Widget enough to pay for it.

Mind the gap. Jump.

Weekend Widget becomes Weekday Widget.

Bliss.

Most of us go about it the other way around.

We want independence, food, shelter, status. We find a boss who pays us - it doesn't really matter what to do and enjoying it is a bonus after all it is called 'work' - to fund these needs. Which leads us to dependence.

We pine for our Weekend Widget - our deep gladness. While the world is denied the benefit of our honestly undertaken journey.

Stop blaming the boss.

Stop blaming the bank.

Begin the journey.

The world needs you.

Alibis.

'Explaining your situation is not going to be nearly as useful as trying to change it through action.'

- Merlin Mann

'I have nothing to say to you,' he said over the telephone.

He was a policeman so he knew his rights.

I had powers of investigation, but not over him.

I was on a deadline and he was a critical witness.

I thought about driving the three hours to try to speak with him in person only so I could say to my boss: 'I even drove for three hours to try to speak with him in person.' I would hang my head and he would put a reassuring hand on my shoulder.

The witness's refusal left me with so many questions and I was running out of time. No less than the Chief of Air Force was waiting on my report. I had so much work to do. I had to write so many more words to hide the fact from the Air Vice Marshal that I had nothing to say. 'What a long report,' he would say. 'You obviously worked so hard.' I needed to do some hard work.

So I went out and bought a newspaper and a coffee and a croissant and did the crossword at a café overlooking the Yarra River. I finished the crossword and sat and watched people for about an hour. Okay it was two.

I was following a rowing crew stroke its way past when it came to me.

I returned to my desk and rang him back.

'I just wanted to let you know that all the other people I've spoken with have laid the blame with you. The evidence as it stands will lead me to make an adverse finding about you so I wanted to give you the opportunity to put your side of the story.'

He spoke for the next two hours.

Step 1: Step Back.

Step 5: Hearing.

Distractions.

Good decision making in three words:

Be attentively curious.

Curiosity is about asking questions.

Attention - according to neuroscientists - is about suppressing distractions rather than enhancing what you're paying attention to.

It's all about the Widget.

Remember the Five Steps.

Step 1: Step Back. Indulge in the distractions. Don't suppress them. Romp in all the feelings and irrational thoughts that won't get the Widget built but that are distracting you from doing so. Be selfish. Purge. Be human. Be yourself.

Step 2: Identify the Issue. Return to the Widget. Start earning your pay. Start asking questions.

Step 3: Assess the Information. Data. Policies. Logic. Cool. Questions.

Step 4: Identify Bias. Am I being distracted by something irrelevant to the Widget? Questions.

Step 5: Give a Hearing. Hey! Affected person! Proof read this! Have I missed anything? Questions.

Questions suppress distractions by forcing us to listen to answers - and by zooming in on the parts of the answers that are Widget relevant.

Make the Decision. Become who you are.

Remove the distractions from everyone who's relying on the decision so that they can do their jobs.

It's called Leadership.

Polite.

'If one of us doesn't say something now we might lose ten years being polite about it.'
- Renée Zellweger - Jerry Maguire

There are many euphemisms for terminating someone's employment.

'Making you available to the labour force' is one.

'Allowing you to find your happiness elsewhere' is my favourite.

There is a school of thought that says a boss's decision to terminate someone's employment should be hers alone. Right, wrong, fair, unfair, stupid, wise. Irrelevant. The boss wants the ditch dug. If she doesn't want to pay me to do it any more because I'm wearing a blue tee shirt - then fine. It's her ditch and her cash.

If I'm as good a ditch digger as I think that I am, why protest? Best I shoulder-arms my shovel and someone will have offered me a job even before it's come to rest on my shrugging shoulder.

If I'm not a good ditch digger, best to find out now because I've got a mortgage. And a life of marrow-sucking days ahead.

Either way - good ditch-digger or woeful - my decisions in response to those made by others are probably teaching each of us both more than if we'd been polite. The boss gets better ditches or regrets being blue-ist. I get a better boss or my bobcat ticket.

The reality is that the industrial laws don't make sacking someone that easy. The legislators and the judges have designed a series of forcing functions into the employment decision-making processes. They compel bosses to follow steps that deter blue tee shirt discriminators making rash sacking decisions that may be damaging to their business and the worker's well-being. Wait. Step Back.

The result is that it's easy to hire and hard to fire.

Perhaps it should be the other way around.

Recruit hard. Mange easy.

Process.

The Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa emerged from hearings by a parliamentary commission into allegations of spying by Australia against his country.

The 'scrambling mass of journalists' surged towards him, wanting answers.

'It's a process and not an event,' he told them, ending their lust for 'decisive' action that would sell newspapers.

Another rich lesson in Good Decision Making.

'The First step,' he said, was 'communication' between the two governments.

In other words: 'Before we decide what to do, let's make sure that both governments' decison-makers have got accurate, first hand information.'

Mr Natalegawa made it clear that, notwithstanding what outcome the Australian Prime Minister wants, the Indonesian president still 'reserves the right to decide if he's happy'.

In other words: 'Indonesia will resolve this matter to its satisfaction.'

He's managing expectations about how long it will take. 

The Deputy Chairman of the Commission Mr Tubagus Hasannudin said: 'For Indonesians, an apology is a matter of principle. Even when we are about to go past someone, we would apologise to them and say 'Excuse me'.

This is the Indonesian Government's Widget.

In summary, Indonesia is saying:

We received information that our sovereignty may have been threatened.

This is a serious issue. So let's take our time to make sure that we get it right.

(Don't expect a decision for perhaps years. Under promise - over deliver.)

We will collect the best information.

Our legal representative of the people - the Parliament - will assess the information.

We will resolve it to Indonesia's satisfaction. 'Indonesia' is the President.

Good decision making is a process and not an event.

Swift.

'If you don't deliberate (at least for a little bit), it's not a decision, it's a reflex.'
- BJ Fogg

According to research by global management consultancy Hay Group (brought to my attention by Jonathon), 94 per cent of Human Resource Directors believe that empowering line managers to make people decisions is a top priority.

In a blog post  by a Hay consultant commenting on the report, he argued that HR needs to be an 'enabler of business performance and swift, efficient decision-making'.

Agreed. Sort of.

It's easy to assume that 'swift and efficient' equals 'good'.

It's easy to mistake the cries of 'I wish someone around here would just make a decision!' as a call for speed and economy. Swift and efficient.

Decisive decision makers are rarely good decision makers.

They look good because they're swift and efficient.

They make decisions alright. Bang, bang, bang. Faster than their harried assistants can drag a pen or finger to cross off each item in a real or virtual To Do list.

'Is that it?' they say at the end, rising from their chair, casting their eyes around the room, before blowing away the wisp of smoke curling from their gun barrel and re-holstering it. 'Good. Meeting adjourned.'

'He's so decisive!' they whisper to each other as they file out of the room.

Few of them see what happens next. The aftermath of decisions made without reflection, delegation, assessment or fairness. The consequences rear-ending each other and bursting into flames in open plan offices all around the organisation. Good people trying to support and execute on swift and efficient decisions that lack logic or evidence or authority or justice.

HR departments should get in line behind the accountants, lawyers and other advisers  and wait their turn to empower line managers' good decision making. In Step 2, and perhaps an encore in Step 3 of the Five Steps to a Good Decision.

If the line manager is a good one, they may have to wait. She will be busy stepping back.

Lines.

On 23 November China declared an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the South China Sea and warned of military action if any aircraft entered it without permission.

A pair of United States Air Force B52 aircraft flew through the ADIZ today and nothing happened.

In 1973 Libya declared the Gulf of Sidra as closed to ships and aircraft from other nations. The US regularly sent ships and aircraft through the Gulf and in 1981 shot down two Libyan fighters that fired at its carrier based fighters.

Under International Law, if nations accept by their actions unilateral declarations by one nation about the extent of its sovereignty for long enough, then the re-defined boundaries become part of the law. Powerful countries like the United States make a point of exercising their freedom of navigation to show that they have not accepted them.

If military aircraft aren't traversing through other countries' ADIZ then they're 'tickling' them. 'Tickling the ADIZ' is flying close to a declared ADIZ boundary and occasionally ducking over it and back out. It is designed to trigger a response from the other country so that the 'tickling' military can gather information about the other's military capabilities.

Aircraft ducks in - ADIZ country activates radar, sends orders and other command and control communications that can be intercepted and analysed, aircraft might be scrambled to intercept, giving an insight into reaction times - aircraft ducks back out, laden with information collected about the other country's defences.

Despite their military utility, ADIZ are a creature of civilian aviation and military aircraft are exempt. They are intended to give air traffic control greater power over civilian aircraft that are in international airspace, but intend to enter sovereign airspace. But if there are eight radar contacts seeking permission to enter an ADIZ and seven declare themselves then it's a good guess what the eighth one is.

Laws, policies, procedures, contracts, agreements, mission statements, values statements, duty statements, codes of conduct, working hours, meeting schedules, delegation registers, deadlines. These are the ADIZ of an organisation. They declare: 'If you do this, you can expect us to do that. If you cross this line, we will respond in this way.'

The lines that we draw and our responses to them literally define us. We are revealed, tested and shaped by the decisions that we make relative to the boundaries in organisations and in our lives, and in the way that we respond to our own and and others' transgressions of them.

In a healthy organisation, boundaries are a shorthand way of an organisation saying:

'We know by our expertise and experience that our Widget is best made if you stay this side of the line. We don't want every person to have to measure out the line themselves or to re-learn what our lawyers, accountants, marketers, HR department, investors and customers have already told us about where the line should be. You've got better things to do - like making the Widget. We've got better things to do than explaining all our thinking behind these boundaries. So you just need to know - here's the line. Don't cross it.

'We also know that many of you will want to test the line or duck over it to see what happens out of your inherent curiosity, mischief, ignorance, laziness, or mistake. Please pay attention to the lines and don't cross them for any reason. Because your innocent action looks exactly the same as that of someone who has more sinister intentions. We don't want to have to inquire into each person's motives. Plus, we want people with good judgement who pay attention and respect our lines. So just stay this side of the line please. Thank you.'

In a healthy organisation, lines are drawn sparingly and only when the law or the Widget demand them, and not as mere power statements. If they are drawn when only absolutely essential, transgressions or 'tickling' of the lines must have clear and unequivocal consequences because by definition they threaten the existence of the organisation's Widget.

As even the Director of Values said in one organisation: 'Do whatever you want within the boundaries, but cross them and you'll get shot.'

Breaches of boundaries can reveal more about a person than that they merely crossed a line.

An organisation's response to a breach can reveal a great deal about the organisation.

Boundaries are the foundation of Good Decision Making. It's Step 2.

Good decision making is an essential part of an organisation's Integrity.

Integrity is doing what you said that you were going to do.

Transition.

‘How did it go?'

Her face was flushed and sweaty after her first day of leading tour groups around New Norcia.

‘Good. No - Excellent. Well, nervous at first. And I nearly lost it at one stage.

'I was walking along with fifteen people behind me and I turned to ask Belinda something. And then I realised that Belinda wasn’t there anymore. It was just me.

'I looked back and saw all those people following me. Me! I started to freak. It hit me that I was It. I’d never thought about what it would be like until then. My stomach started churning and I just wanted to run. I suddenly felt all this responsibility. It happened in a rush.’

‘You obviously didn’t run.’

‘No. I looked over my shoulder and saw that they were all still following behind me. So I just kept walking. Kept leading them to the next stop on the tour. And then the next one after that.

About halfway through I began to relax. I realised that I just had to keep walking and that they would follow me. I know the town history and they wanted to hear about it. I almost started laughing at one point because I knew that I could go anywhere and say anything and that they would follow and listen and nod. Scary to think what I could have done without them knowing any different and anyone to tell them otherwise.

'By the end, I was enjoying it.'

True Leaders - not PowerPoint ones - you remember the feeling of transition.

The churning stomach. The weight of other people's decision making loading upon your shoulders like discarded rifles surrendered by a defeated army.

The sound of a serious stranger's voice coming from your mouth with your Father's words, or a teacher's, or a book, or a movie - from somewhere but not from your heart. 

That first decision that you made to lead those people somewhere that you eventually learned - or are still learning - is leading you back to yourself.

Leaders are brave.

Disengaged.

The Gallup organisation recently released a report that 87% of workers in the world are either not engaged or actively disengaged from their work. 

In Australia, the percentage  of engaged workers is a little higher at 24%. Yippee.

Only 19% of Australian bosses are engaged in their jobs. An interesting form of leadership - 'Follow me and be disengaged!'

(If you're someone's boss reading this and you're thinking 'Meh...', then it's likely you're one of the 81%.)

Gallup estimates that disengaged workers cost Australia $54.8 Billion a year. That's almost double the Education budget.

Think about that.

It's breathtakingly remarkable.

Each day in Australia, three out of four people:

Sit in traffic.

Pull their chairs up to their keyboards.

Occupy that space.

Briefly vacate it to sing 'Happy Birthday Miriam' alongside mostly other disengaged workers in the staff room and despite a 75% chance that Miriam didn't care.

Perhaps have a meeting with three out of four other disengaged workers to report to a boss who's probably not interested.

Sit in traffic.

Grow older.

Repeat. 251 times a year. For half a century.

What to do?

Engagement begins with the act of decision making.

When we make good decisions, we declare who and where we are.

We nail our colours to the mast.

We reveal ourselves.

We connect with other workers, our boss, customers, critics, with the organisation and its Widget.

We invite, demand, call on them to do the same.

Bosses - give your workers Widget clarity, authentic support, trust and affirmation and delegate decisions to the lowest appropriate level. Teach them about how to make a good decision and model it yourself.

Back them even when there's a mistake. Back them in front of your boss. Back them when someone complains.

Most of all, back yourself to have the courage and leadership to trust your workers.

This act of bravery alone will scare you into engagement with them.

Workers - make good decisions. Don't wait for permission - just make them methodically and learn from it. Your fear will surely engage you with your boss in what happens next.

We must stand up on our desks and shout 'O Captain, My Captain!'

Committed.

The Australian Electoral Commission continues to model good decision making.

Just to recap.

The AEC conducted the election for Senators in Western Australia. It assembled its Widget.

It counted votes and the candidates with the most votes won Senate seats. It produced its Widget.

'The result was too close,' some people said. 'The Widget isn't right. Make another one.'

'The Widget's fine,' the Western Australian Electoral Commissioner said.

Some of the losing candidates complained. 'We don't like the Widget because we didn't get elected...er, no...because it's not the Widget we wanted...er, no...because there's too much doubt about the democratic process!'

'I agree that the Widget hasn't turned out the way that it should,' the Federal Electoral Commissioner said upholding the appeal and ordering a re-count. 'Not for the reasons given by the losers, but because our customers ordered a Confidence coloured Widget and its colour is flaking and fading. We have to remake it.'

The re-count began and found that votes were missing. The AEC searched and could not find them. It appointed an independent investigator.

Before the investigator could report back, the AEC said 'We know enough already. Our Widget is so important that we have to get it right. We think it's not good enough. We're not going to wait for someone else to complain about our Widget. We're going to do it. Let's ask the High Court to confirm that we failed and tell us what we need to do fix it.'

Remarkable.

This rare integrity in decision making is only possible when a decision maker has Widget authenticity and clarity.

Every organisation claims to be 'committed to...' something. Committed to excellence in... Committed to the welfare of... Committed to the safety of... Committed to our customers...

Committed.

'Committed to' implies that we've leapt. The bullet has been fired. The train has left the station. We won't be satisfied until we've produced excellence, welfare, safety, customer satisfaction. Nothing will stop us. There is nothing foreseen or unforeseen that will cause us to waver us from what we have committed ourselves to do. We have no choice now.

Yet the reality for most organisations is that Committed To is the excited language of the salesman and the marketer and the PR person being put into the mouth of the Widget maker to get people to buy the Widget. It rarely comes off the assembly line in that colour. It's too hard.

Which is why the decision making of the AEC is so extraordinary and very reassuring, as its role is:

to deliver the franchise: that is, an Australian citizen's right to vote, as established by the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918.

Process.

Good decision making objectifies the outcome.

It puts distance between the result and our self worth.

It builds a firewall between our process and whatever happens next.

The more that we see our decisions as an extension of our personalities the less we are able to let go.

Step Back.

Identify the Issue.

Assess the Information.

Check for Bias.

Give a Hearing.

Make the decision.

Watch what happens next.

Learn.

Repeat.

Do your job.

Get paid.

Go home.

Really.

Leadership.

Really?

Are our open plan offices so bursting with innovation and discovery that we need every other line manager to attend leadership courses to equip them with the unique skills needed to inspire their timid and feckless workers towards uncharted spreadsheets?

‘We need leadership’.

May as well say to the aspiring leaders ‘These people over here aren’t going to do what we want them to do without someone qualified to direct them.'

May as well say to the workers ‘Wait right there and someone will be along shortly to tell you what to do.’

So people who may have run a business, buried a parent, given birth, passed exams, travelled the world, owned investment properties, survived cancer, chaired committees, fought bushfires, built a house, played the saxophone, spoken three languages, served on a jury, run a marathon, migrated from overseas, coached a sporting team, choreographed a musical, run a household...

Suddenly need to be led.

Really?

Perhaps our obsession with demanding leadership just ends up producing followers.  Call a man a leader and you compel him to have followers. Supply and demand.

The leaders remain mediocre at best (because Leadership is hard and requires practice in situations that demand Leadership, not management) and the workers become skilled at waiting to be told what to do. Why not? May as well play the game. Let these 'leaders' earn their salaries and we can conserve our initiative and energy for the areas of our lives where we have to 'lead' - running a household or caring for an elderly parent or planning a holiday or searching for a new job.

So our leaders nurture disengaged workers. Which results in increased demand for leadership training to motivate them.

(Full disclosure: People pay me to deliver leadership training.)

Perhaps we should spend more leadership training time and money on less sparkly things.

Like defining the Widget. Writing accurate job descriptions. Drafting honest recruitment ads. Conducting better employment interviews. Writing simpler contracts. Running practical orientation. Building better workspaces. Making good decisions. Having authentic conversations. Doing what we said we'd do.

Really.

'Most organisations herd racehorses and race sheep.'

- Anonymous

Longer.

Slow down.

Take your time. 

Give the decision the time and attention it deserves. 

The time and attention that everyone affected by it deserves. 

Your time is precious. 

The more time that you invest in a decision - in anything - the more that you will care about it. 

If you care about a decision - about anything - you're more likely to do a better job.

The more important a decision, the longer it should take.

'Creativity is caring enough to keep thinking about something until you find the simplest way to do it.' 

- Tim Cook

Investigate.

‘Investigation’ has sinister, negative overtones.  

‘We’re carrying out an investigation.’ ‘I'm being investigated.’  

These all imply that someone has done something wrong. The jury has returned, guilt has been proven, the judge has begun to read out the punishment.

The Defence Force tried to overcome this assumption by calling investigations ‘Inquiries’.  Then ‘Inquiry’ developed its own negative connotations. So Defence called then ‘Quick Assessments’. Now Quick Assessments are being replaced with something else.

Yet good decision making demands that we gather as much information as we can – ie investigate.

An investigation can be as simple as a telephone call, a conversation, a read of a policy, an email – or as complex as a royal commission.

What information do you need before you can decide what to do?

What is important is the attitude that you take to the gathering of information.

Be curious.

'Be curious. Read widely. Try new things. What people call intelligence just boils down to curiosity.'

- Aaron Swartz

'Our ancestors who were not curious who did not go looking over the hill to see what was on the other side disappeared. They were not successful. Tribes that were curious out competed them.' 

- Bill Nye

‘To be wise is to be eternally curious.’

- Frederick Buechner

‘What I believe is that all clear-minded people should remain two things throughout their lifetimes: curious and teachable.’

- Roger Ebert

Visible.

A Leader makes the work visible.

In knowledge work, decisions build upon other decisions as they move along the assembly line to emerge as the organisation's Widget.

A Leader makes decisions that are visible in process and outcome to others who need to follow.

The word educate comes from educare which means to ‘draw out’.

Leaders draw out followers by making decisions that in turn open up space for them to make their own decisions that they know will be supported by the Leader.

We will follow someone whose decision making processes are transparent and predictable. We gain the confidence to make our own decisions that build upon and enable the decisions of our Leader.

Leaders are teachers and teachers are leaders because through their decisions they draw others into engagement with the world.

Many ‘leaders’ do the opposite. They make decisions in isolation and using processes and reasons only known to them. They sit in meetings where they have exclusive access to information that they use to make decisions. They then expect their followers to act on their decisions based on positional power alone.

A Leader whose decisions are based on policies or other visible processes and who is not afraid or too busy to explain her reasoning, particularly in response to criticism or complaint – or...her own mistakes...is more likely to draw out her followers from their bunkers of fear or suspicion.

'The decision about what to do next is even more important than the labor spent executing it. A modern productive worker is someone who does a great job in figuring out what to do next.'

Seth Godin

Primary.

 'To defend Australia and her interests, Sir?' the Air Force First Year Defence Force Academy cadet said in answer to my question.

'Yes, but no, ' I said nodding towards the Navy Midshipman with her hand up. 

'To protect Australia's sea lanes, Sir?' she said.

'The main aim. What's the main aim of the Australian Defence Force,' I repeated. 

Only two hands remained in the air. I picked them off.

'No - not to assist in natural disasters. We do that, sure, but that's not why we exist. And no, not to assist in Peacekeeping. Again, we do it, but it's not the primary role of the military.'

I scanned the young faces staring back at me, barely clean of their mums' lipstick on their cheeks as they were farewelled into the arms of the Navy, Army and Air Force as Midshipmen and Officer Cadets.

'Those answers got you through the recruiting process, but none of them defines the job that you've signed up to for the next nine years. So let me tell you:

'To apply the maximum amount of violence permitted by law upon the enemy.' 

Some faces froze. Others began to grin.

'That's the aim of the Australian Defence Force,' I said, looking at each of their young faces in turn. 'To apply the maximum amount of violence permitted by law upon the enemy.' The job of an Officer is to ensure that those under your command use their weapons violently and lawfully. Which is why it's been said that, as Officers, you are a 'Manager of Violence'. Other people here will teach you about the management and the violence. I'm here to teach you about Military Law.'

It's obvious why the military fudges its advertised Widget. Organisations camouflage their Widget for many reasons. Most are to do with marketing and recruiting. 

This is where most of the difficulty applying Widget Thinking begins. If we don't advertise, recruit, contract, orientate, train, promote, manage, terminate - make decisions - using the Widget as our reference point, then we're navigating with a swinging compass without a True North.  

The latest scandal to hit the Australian Defence Force has had the talkback lines buzzing. 'We don't want our daughter joining the Army after we heard about this behaviour,' one father called in to say. 'We don't think it's safe for her.' 

Made.

The Widget doesn't care. 

It just wants to be made. 

It doesn't care if it's by a man or a woman. Old or young. Rich or poor. Buddhist or Rastafarian. Mother or Transgender. Morning person or late arrival. Part time or full. Masters degree or apprentice. Black or white. Make it.

Did the Widget get made? Boom. 

Widget Thinking creates clear job ads and precise duty statements with good salaries that attract skilled workers with realistic expectations to cooperate with co-workers in safe workplaces to make Widgets.

Widget Thinking is the answer to all the isms.

A workplace where there is harassment, bullying, hazards, discrimination, conflicts of interest, illegality or unethical behaviour produces Widgets made by distracted, fearful, unqualified, wasteful workers.

The Widget will roll off the literal or metaphorical assembly line as the unsentimental, disinterested, objective witness to any isms.

Because the Widget doesn't care. 

Neurons.

'I'm sorry that I didn't seek your advice today,' the Air Commander said over drinks in the Mess, 'But I didn't have a neuron spare.' 

I'd watched from two seats along as he'd coordinated fighter aircraft launches into the skies over Northern Australia and beyond to defend it against waves of attack by the Kamarian Air Force. He was making a decision about every two minutes for eight hours.

What I wanted do say was 'You need to practise having a neuron spare, Sir. Better for you to practise and learn when the air battles are staged.' But I didn't. I was only a Flight Lieutenant Lawyer and he was a Group Captain Fighter Pilot and I wanted to make it to Squadron Leader. 

 'We didn't have the resources to stop and attend to the enemy wounded,' the Army Lieutenant Colonel Infantry Officer had explained to the International Committee of the Red Cross representative who reported this breach of the Law of War to me in Exercise HQ. 'They need to train as they would fight,' I wrote in my post-Exercise Report. 'They must learn what resources that they need to fight lawfully.' I scraped promotion to Squadron Leader.

 'We don't have time to comply with the various policies in this organisation,' the senior executive said to me as his peers in the audience nodded with folded arms. 'We're too busy doing our jobs.' More nodding and the beginnings of applause. 'You need to practise having a neuron spare,' I quoted myself. 'Those policies are laws and doing your job means doing it lawfully.' I glanced across at the CEO who was texting on his phone. 

Good decision making is a skill. Like any skill it needs to be practised until it becomes routine. We need to build the neural pathways by applying the Five Steps until doing so is unconscious. It's called being Professional.

The Air Commander wondered out loud how he could resolve his Rules of Engagement with the radar blips playing out on the huge screen covering the wall in front of us. It was the last wave of the week. 'Air-to-air missiles are not classed as 'aircraft' under International Law, Sir,' I said, loudly beginning my unsolicited advice.

He bought me a drink in the Mess that night.  'Let's kill a few of those neurons you made me exercise today,' he said.

Beard.

There's an old man with a long white beard and a big book who sits at a large desk in a larger office at the head of every organisation. 

Even Liz concedes that it's a man and that he has a long white beard. 

That old man is very wise and has all the answers. 

('The Onion' ran an article along similar lines about a team of people in a room looking after the entire United States.) 

But he's kept in the dark by incompetent people in the management hierarchy below him and so bad things happen to people without his knowledge. 

If only we could get past our line manager, her line manager, and everyone in between us and the old man with the long white beard.

If only we knew his direct number and could bypass the help desk, customer service or call centre operator. 

If only we could appeal to him the decision that we didn't like. 

If only we could tell him our side of the story. 

He would listen. Nod. Stroke his long white beard. 

He would open up his big book and flick a few pages.  Run his finger down the wise words written in it.

He would look up, adjust his glasses, smile at us from behind his long white beard and say: 

'You're right. Sorry. I'll fix it for you.'

He would make things right.  

He would make us happy again. 

I worked for an organisation whose policies allowed a decision to be appealed up to six times - beyond the Chief Executive Officer and to a government minister. 

One appeal step was a review of the decision by a committee of experts and the complainant's peers. 

 'Nothing ever gets resolved,' complainants complained.

'Nothing ever gets resolved,' managers complained. 

Leaders nurture good decision making by supporting decisions made at the lowest appropriate level and at the earliest appropriate time. 

Because there is no old man with a long white beard. 

Consequences.

The Australian Electoral Commission gave another example of Good Decision Making today. 

Ed Killesteyn the AEC Commissioner was interviewed on Radio National on the decision by the AEC to declare the Senate result in Western Australia despite the disappearance of 1375 votes.

He began by acknowledging the 'gravity' of the situation and apologising to the electors.

He said that he was left with 'a nagging and almost irreconcilable doubt' about the result of the WA Senate election. 

The journalist then asked him if this was the case, 'Why on earth is the AEC going to declare the Senate result in WA this afternoon?'

'I have no choice,' Mr Killesteyn replied. 'I am obligated to declare the result. Legally I have no other choice.' 

'So you need to do this so that it can be referred to the courts?'  the journalist asked.

'That's correct. The 40 day petition period to the courts is only enlivened once the last of all the writs has been returned. '

The Commissioner then summarised to the Australian public, via the journalist, everything that he had done to find the missing votes. 

The AEC had already begun an inquiry into the missing votes and was reviewing its procedures.

Mr Killesteyn understands that he is a servant of the Law, which says that he must declare the election. Despite some withering criticism, he recognises that he must make this decision to allow the consequences to begin flowing from it, whatever they may be.

He steps back from his own doubt and uncertainty and does his job. He produces his Widget so that others may produce theirs.

Like most good leaders, Mr Killesteyn is not in the heroic model. He is a career public servant who appears to have discharged his duties without fanfare or fuss.

In a 2009 speech he listed the four principles under which the AEC operated in order to build public confidence in its impartiality, one of which was 'decision-making in accordance with objective application of the law'.

He quoted from a speech given by the Indian Chief Election Commissioner, who said that the Indian organisation was able to retain the confidence of the electors because it was 'a listening Commission'.

Listening.

The Indian Commissioner concluded by saying: 

'Being human, we can be wrong sometimes, but our intention should never be impure.'

Mr Killesteyn's words and tone of speech showed that he understood and accepted that his organisation had failed in fulfilling its public duty to deliver on nothing short of the democratic process of a Federal Election.

Yet his voice during the interview was calm, measured, steady and without the edge that one expects from someone under so much criticism. Possibly because he was liberated by the knowledge that while he had failed in his Widget, his decision making was flawless.

His response today was even more remarkable given that it was he who decided to overrule the WA Electoral Commissioner's original decision and to allow the re-count that has ultimately revealed his organisation's errors and undermined public confidence in it, and in him. 

Leaders are Brave.