The Biggest Risk: “No News”
You may have started reading this article expecting an analysis of the latest scandal or event. Today, however, we will deliberately use the situation of “no news” as our subject. This is because the governance of many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) often breaks down precisely during the “peaceful, uneventful daily routine” where no major news-making incidents occur.
When a major corporation’s misconduct is reported, business leaders often check a list, asking, “Are we okay?” However, that sense of urgency fades within days, buried under daily operations. This is the biggest blind spot. Governance is not about looking for a fire extinguisher after a fire starts; it’s about embedding fire-prevention design into daily habits. Based on practical experience with over 38 companies, today we share specific methods to improve your company’s “decision quality” without relying on news headlines.
The “Black Box” of Decision-Making Leads to Trouble
There is a typical pattern seen in many SMEs. The owner or a handful of executives make countless small decisions daily—contract terms with clients, employee matters, go/no-go decisions on new ventures, system implementations. These judgments are often based on the immediate situation, experience, and gut feeling. The “why” behind the decision remains in the person’s head, unrecorded.
This is the “black boxing of decision-making.” When this state persists, three major risks accumulate.
Risk 1: Loss of Continuity Due to Personal Dependency
Because the rationale for decisions resides in an individual’s mind, the moment that person is absent (due to illness, resignation, etc.), the reasons for past decisions become lost. The successor must verify from scratch why a certain contract term was set or a particular system was chosen, leading to extreme inefficiency.
Risk 2: Loss of Learning and Improvement Opportunities
Without a record of the decision and its outcome, it’s impossible to objectively review whether the judgment was correct or mistaken. Both successes and failures get dismissed as “just good/bad luck,” preventing the accumulation of organizational decision-making know-how.
Risk 3: The Crisis of Failing Accountability
When a problem does arise and external parties (clients, shareholders, regulators) ask, “Why did you make that decision?” vague explanations relying solely on memory can instantly destroy trust. A lack of records carries a high risk of being interpreted as “not having considered it” or even “concealing something.”
Practical Guide: The 3-Step “Decision Record” You Can Start Today
So, how can we prevent this “black boxing” and visualize/improve decision quality? You don’t need a massive system implementation. Try applying the following three steps to the next important decision you make.
Step 1: Verbalize “At Least Three” Options
When facing a situation requiring a decision, don’t proceed with just the first idea that comes to mind (Option A). Always ask yourself, “Is there another way?” Consider Options B and C, and write them down in simple terms. For example, for a decision on “increasing new hires”:
- Option A: Hire one new full-time employee.
- Option B: Temporarily utilize an experienced contractor, then evaluate and offer a permanent position.
- Option C: Improve the efficiency of existing staff and postpone hiring for now.
The significance of this exercise lies not so much in “making the decision” itself, but in leaving a tangible record of “having considered” alternatives. Even if Options B or C seem unrealistic, that’s fine. The very process of thinking broadens perspective and prevents decisions based on assumptions.
Step 2: Rate the “Pros & Cons” of Each Option on a 1–99 Scale
Next, list the potential advantages and disadvantages for each option. The key here is not to think of risk in binary terms of “exists/doesn’t exist” (0 or 100). Try expressing the “probability of occurrence” and “impact if it occurs” with a numerical value from 1 to 99, even if it’s just an estimate.
Evaluating the disadvantage “the hire fails” for Option A (full-time hire) from the previous example:
- Probability of Occurrence: 30 (about a 30% chance)
- Impact Level: 70 (moderate waste of personnel costs, negative impact on the team)
Quantifying in this way allows for concrete comparison: “The risk of a failed hire has a moderate chance of occurring, but the damage if it happens is significant.” Instead of abstractly debating “the risk is high” in meetings, it enables substantive discussion: “Which risk do we take—one with a probability of 40 and impact of 60, or one with a probability of 10 and impact of 90?”
Step 3: Record the “Reason for Adoption” and “Reason for Rejection” as a Set
Let’s say you ultimately choose Option A. At that point, don’t just record “Adopted Option A.” Be sure to record the following three points together:
- Final Chosen Option: Option A
- Reason for Choosing (Decision Criteria): “Mid-to-long-term talent development is necessary, which cannot be covered by the temporary solution of Option B. Judged that efficiency improvements alone (Option C) cannot handle the current workload.”
- Rejected Options and Reasons: “Option B has lower short-term cost, but poses challenges regarding organizational belonging. Option C is ideal, but considering current work pressure, the risk (probability 80, impact 50) is too high.”
This record is the greatest gift to your future self or your successor. When circumstances change, it provides a clear basis for updating the decision: “Back then, we chose Option A based on the need for ‘mid-to-long-term talent development.’ The situation is different now, so Option B might be more appropriate.”
The 3 Organizational Values Created by “Decision Records”
When this seemingly tedious habit takes root, the following changes emerge within the organization.
Value 1: From “Personalization” to “Systematization” of Decision-Making
By visualizing the decision-making process, the quality of decisions, once dependent on the individual leader’s capability, accumulates as an organizational asset. New members can also quickly learn the company’s decision criteria by reading past decision records.
Value 2: Improved Psychological Safety and Clarified Responsibility
Because “why that option was chosen” is recorded, even if the outcome later turns out poorly, it enables constructive discussion focused on “verifying the conditions at the time of that decision” rather than blaming an individual. This enhances team psychological safety and encourages more challenging decisions.
Value 3: Function as “Proof” for Governance
If you are ever asked for an explanation by an external party, this record serves as powerful evidence that “our company made a decision based on a rational process after considering available options.” Compliance and governance are not just about following rules; they are about creating a state where you can explain the “rationality of your judgments” in this way.
Before / After: The Change in a Leader Who Records
Before (No Recording):
Chased by daily decisions, repeating “the best for the moment.” Relies on memory for past decision reasons, struggles with similar problems. When issues arise, tends to search memory for defensive excuses. Organizational decision-making know-how remains tacit knowledge.
After (Recording Habit Established):
The habit of pausing to consider options before important decisions becomes ingrained. The basis for decisions becomes clear, allowing awareness of one’s own thinking patterns. Team discussions shift to productive “comparison of options.” Past records make future decisions faster and more reliable. Explanations to external parties can also be forward-looking and fact-based.
Strengthening governance does not start with creating thick manuals. It reliably begins today by making each of your decisions “visible” and improving their quality. Major, news-making failures are born from the accumulation of such daily, “unrecorded judgments.” Start by trying these “3 steps” with just one agenda item in your next meeting. From there, you will build the foundation of an autonomous, strong organization that is not swayed by the news.
Comments