When Big Decisions Yield Small Outcomes

Strategic choices require friction to stick.

Most people get this backwards.

They want major decisions to be easy. They forego the difficulties of discernment and debate, then act surprised when efforts to execute that decision evaporate into the aether.

The media loves to portray successful CEOs as the Platonic ideal of wisdom and clear-headedness. As though that decision to pivot the firm, pull off an acquisition, or make that “bet the company” move were made as easily as picking off the lunch menu. Rarely do you hear about the consternation, the sleepless nights, or the debate with a colleague that got ugly. Those difficulties are for a lesser breed of executive. Or at least that’s how the media sees it.

Yet if you’re dealing with a major decision now, the path in front of you looks anything but clear. Whatever choice you make brings tradeoffs and risks. You may have a point of view, but your CFO is advocating for an entirely different response. Your board doesn’t even understand the problem.

Are they wrong? Or is it you?

Years ago, an employer of mine was at a crossroads. The business had tapped out its target market and revenue hit a plateau. On paper, the choice was straightforward: build new products for the same market, or expand the existing product into new markets? But the answer wasn’t. Building a new product would have required outside investors, which the company hadn’t taken on before. Taking the existing product into new markets was unproven; was there even demand?

The CEO was excited about both, but there was never a real, thoughtful discussion around what to do.

We ended up straddling: some mild product improvements (nothing innovative) and a half-hearted attempt to push into adjacent markets. Neither got the investment it needed. When things got difficult, we pulled back. Today the company is in the same place as it was all those years ago: same product, same market, same revenue. The problem wasn’t that we didn’t see the issue. The problem was that we never put enough energy into the decision process itself.

No energy in means no energy out.

In metallurgy, there is a technique called friction welding. You take two rods of steel, rotate them along their axes at high speed, and hold the ends together. The friction heats the metal and fuses it together.

Spin the metal too slowly, though, and nothing happens.

The decision you’re working through right now is no different. Your decision won’t stick unless you’re committed to it. Unless you go all in. Unless you create the heat that fuses your choice into action. That heat will never come if you put the choice aside. If you never wrestle with its consequences or try to have it both ways by splitting your efforts.

That debate you just had with your executive team isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a healthy sign that you understand the gravity of your situation.

But not all friction is created equal.

Sears used to be the retail powerhouse. When Edward Lampert took over in the 2000s, he pitted each line of business against the others. Clothing, tools, and appliances all had to compete for internal resources. The idea was that by creating internal competition, each unit would become healthier and stronger.

Except that Sears had a bigger problem. Retail was moving to e-commerce. For Sears, making such a shift would have required massive internal coordination. But too much infighting, too much debate, and too much misalignment kept Sears stuck in the 1900s. Today most shoppers have forgotten Sears altogether.

Internal combustion engines are a lot like Sears.

If you fail to lubricate the engine, heat will build up and create friction. Eventually that friction will seize the engine.

At Sears, internal friction seized the entire operation, and it was left with no room to maneuver. This is why you must understand what kind of friction you are creating:

Discernment friction creates the energy that turns decision into action.
Operational friction creates the energy that stops a business in its tracks.

When Satya Nadella took over the CEO role at Microsoft in 2014, the future of the business was uncertain. Microsoft had already missed the boat on mobile and search, and was fixated on Windows and Office. Instead of jumping into action, he sought friction. In his book, Hit Refresh, he wrote:

“I knew that to lead effectively I needed to get some things square in my own mind — and, ultimately, in the minds of everyone who works at Microsoft. Why does Microsoft exist? And why do I exist in this new role? These are questions everyone in every organization should ask themselves. I worried that failing to ask these questions, and truly answer them, risked perpetuating earlier mistakes and, worse, not being honest.”

The decision you’re facing now won’t be solved by putting it on the back burner.

It needs more heat than that.

Maybe it’s time to stop avoiding friction, and time to start creating it.

As the founder of Flag & Frontier, John Rougeux partners with executive teams to align on their strategic narrative, build belief in the market, and win the next chapter of their business. You can connect with John on LinkedIn.