Disagree and Commit: The importance of disagreement in decision making
Written by Simón Muñoz, Principal Product Manager at Voicemod
“Disagree and Commit” is a management principle that encourages alignment and goal achievement in a company. As with many of the pioneering management principles in the IT industry, it originates back to when Andy Grove was the CEO of Intel.
The “Disagree and Commit” principle has two main objectives:
- To encourage the team to disagree when making an important decision.
- To unite the team so that it commits to the decision once it has been made.
Disagree: Avoiding the consensus trap
When people hear the word “disagree” it’s usually not tied to a positive connotation. But when it comes to the workplace and team management, disagreeing — when done thoughtfully and constructively — is both inevitable and healthy.
Why would we want to encourage disagreement when making a decision? Because it makes the final decision more effective. To illustrate the importance of disagreement in decision-making, Peter Drucker, who is widely considered the godfather of management, tells a story about Alfred Sloan, the man who, in the 1930s, turned General Motors into the biggest company in the world.
The story, as told by Drucker, begins in a meeting with the advisory board of General Motors in which an important decision had to be made. Upon speaking to everyone in attendance and realizing that they all agreed with the original proposal, Sloan said:
“I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.” — Alfred Sloan.
By suggesting this, Sloan was trying to avoid the consensus trap. What is the consensus trap? This is when everyone seems to be in agreement during a meeting, but in reality:
- The majority disagrees, but simply keeps quiet.
- The decision is so important that nobody wants to assume full responsibility.
- Everyone wants to get the meeting over and done with as soon as possible.
We can encourage disagreement and avoid the consensus trap with one easy technique: Interpret silence as a negative and ask every person in the meeting directly if they agree with the decision.
We should never consider silence in a meeting to mean that everyone in attendance is accepting of the results or decision. That’s why it’s essential to make sure that everyone present agrees by asking them clearly to say their point of view out loud.
But the fact remains that sometimes people will say whatever they need to say in order to end the meeting. And that’s where the second part of the “Disagree and Commit” principle comes in.
Commit: Executing the decision
Committing means that whatever final decision is made, the team must do whatever they can to implement it. This is achievable by ensuring that everyone at the meeting is responsible for owning and completing their work.
But why would people implement a decision they didn’t agree with? First, everyone at the meeting has had the opportunity to express their opinion and has been heard. Even though their point of view may be at odds with the final decision, it’s easier for them to accept it knowing that at least they were heard. And maybe by the end of the meeting, they no longer agree with their initial ideas at all.
Additionally, if we actively disagree with a decision, the last thing we want is for it to fail because it was badly implemented. By this token, the more we oppose an idea, the harder we work to bring it to fruition. Andy Grover himself said:
“If you disagree with an idea, you should work especially hard to implement it well because that way when it fails you’ll know it was a bad idea. Not bad execution.” — Andy Grove.
“Disagree and Commit” speeds up decision making
Another interesting result of this method is that it helps save a lot of time discussing the same topic over and over again. In other words, by following the “Disagree and Commit” principle, you increase productivity during meetings and cut down on external discussions.
By the same token, Jeff Bezos introduced the term in one of his annual letters to the investors at Amazon:
Third, use the phrase “disagree and commit.” This phrase will save a lot of time. If you have conviction on a particular direction even though there’s no consensus, it’s helpful to say, “Look, I know we disagree on this but will you gamble with me on it? Disagree and commit?” — Jeff Bezos.
In fact, this principle has become one of the principles of leadership at Amazon:
13. Have backbone, disagree and commit
Leaders are obligated to respectfully challenge decisions when they disagree, even when doing so is uncomfortable or exhausting. Leaders have conviction and are tenacious. They do not compromise for the sake of social cohesion. Once a decision is determined, they commit wholly.
The great thing about the “Disagree and Commit” principle is that, when done correctly, it assures the best possible result for the business:
- Even if we were wrong, we still in some way contributed to the best possible decision being made.
- If we were right, then we know the weaker ideas have been discarded in the shortest time possible.
Thus, we avoid the worst possible scenario, in which a small minority feels they have contributed to making a decision but the rest of the team isn’t compelled to implement it because they don’t support it. Try implementing the “Disagree and Commit” principle into your work culture and see the advantages that productive disagreement and commitment can bring to your teams and business.
If you want to know more
- Product Management in Practice: A Real-World Guide to the Key Connective Role of the 21st Century, by Matt LeMay
- The Advantage, Enhanced Edition: Why Organizational Health Trumps Everything Else In Business, by Patrick M. Lencioni
- Disagree and Commit, a blog post by Tom Tunguz
- Hackernews thread in which the use of Disagree & Commit is debated
