The opposite problem, but one that is seen surprisingly often (i.e., having so much conflicting information that it is impossible to see ‘the wood for the trees’). This is sometimes called Analysis Paralysis.

This problem can often be resolved by getting everyone together to decide what information is really important and why, and by setting a clear timescale for decision-making, including an information-gathering stage.

Making decisions by committee is difficult. Everyone has their own views, and their own values. And while it’s important to know what these views are, and why and how they are important, it may be essential for one person to take responsibility for making a decision. Sometimes, any decision is better than none.

Decision-making processes are often found under the weight of vested interests. These vested interests are often not overtly expressed but may be a crucial blockage. Because they are not overtly expressed, it is hard to identify them clearly, and therefore address them, but it can sometimes be possible to do so by exploring them with someone outside the process, but in a similar position.

People are often very attached to the status quo. Decisions tend to involve the prospect of change, which many people find difficult.

Sometimes it’s difficult to make a decision because you just don’t care one way or the other. In this case, a structured decision-making process can often help by identifying some very real pros and cons of particular actions, that perhaps you hadn’t thought about before.