Decisions
10 min

Disagree and commit

State the disagreement on the record, then execute the decision fully, so that dissent does not become passive resistance.

Time cost
10 min
Output
A written objection, a written response, and a testable prediction.
Steps
5

Use when

  • A decision has been made and someone who disagrees must carry it out.
  • A group is repeatedly reopening settled decisions.
  • Execution is being undermined by people who never said they objected.

Do not use when

  • The objection is ethical or safety-related. Those are not disagreements to commit past.
  • It is used to end discussion prematurely, which turns a useful norm into a way of suppressing dissent.

Inputs required

  • A made decision
  • A stated disagreement
  • A record

Procedure

  1. 01

    Make the disagreement explicit first

    Written, specific, and before commitment. “I think this fails because X” is committable; unstated reluctance is not.

  2. 02

    Confirm it was heard

    The decider states the objection back and says why they are proceeding anyway. Skipping this makes the commitment coerced rather than given.

  3. 03

    Commit fully

    Execute as if you had agreed. Half-execution by a dissenter produces a failure that confirms nothing, because the decision was never actually tried.

  4. 04

    Record the prediction

    The dissenter writes what they expect to go wrong and by when. This makes the disagreement testable and makes it worth having had.

  5. 05

    Check at the review date

    Return to the record. Whoever was right, the practice of writing it down is what makes future disagreements useful rather than repetitive.

Characteristic failure mode

Commit without disagree. The norm is invoked to close discussion, objections never get stated, and the organisation loses the information the dissenters had.

Worked example

A team adopts a new review process over one member’s objection.

  1. 01Objection written: this will add three days to every change.
  2. 02Decider responds in writing: accepted risk, reviewing in eight weeks.
  3. 03Prediction recorded with a number.

Result

At eight weeks the delay is 1.5 days, not three. The objector was half right, the threshold for review is already agreed, and nobody had to relitigate anything in between.

Where to go next

Also cited by
DACI