본문으로 건너뛰기

Decision Types

Understanding decision categories, authority levels, and who can make what choices

Overview​

Not all decisions are created equal. Some choices are reversible experiments; others commit the organization for years. Some affect only your immediate work; others ripple across the entire company. Understanding decision types helps you know when you can act independently, when you need approval, and who holds authority for different choice categories.

Kyndof categorizes decisions across multiple dimensions: scope (individual/team/department/organization), impact (low/medium/high/critical), reversibility (easily reversed/difficult to reverse/irreversible), and domain (technical/business/operational/strategic). These dimensions combine to determine decision authority and approval requirements.

Correctly categorizing decisions prevents both reckless execution (treating consequential choices as trivial) and bureaucratic paralysis (seeking approval for routine work). When in doubt about decision category, err toward seeking guidance rather than assuming authority.

Decision Dimensions​

Before exploring specific decision types, understand the dimensions that characterize choices:

Scope Dimension​

Individual Scope: Decisions affecting only your own work with no dependencies on others. Individual-scope decisions typically require no approval—you're trusted to make good choices within your role.

Examples: code implementation approach, work schedule within team norms, tool choice for personal productivity, task prioritization within assigned work.

Team Scope: Decisions affecting your immediate team's work, coordination, or resources. Team-scope decisions usually need team lead or project owner approval.

Examples: sprint commitments, team process changes, internal deadlines, task allocation among team members.

Department Scope: Decisions affecting the entire department or requiring department resources. Department-scope decisions require department head approval.

Examples: department roadmap priorities, hiring requisitions, department budget allocation, cross-team process changes.

Organizational Scope: Decisions affecting the entire organization, multiple departments, or external stakeholders. Organization-scope decisions need executive or CEO approval.

Examples: company strategy, organizational structure, company-wide policies, major partnerships, brand decisions.

Impact Dimension​

Low Impact: Consequences limited to temporary inconvenience or minor inefficiency. Low-impact decisions warrant fast action over thorough analysis. Mistakes are learning opportunities, not crises.

Examples: trying new project management tool for one sprint, scheduling team social event, formatting standard for documentation.

Medium Impact: Consequences affecting team productivity, project timelines, or moderate resources. Medium-impact decisions deserve deliberate consideration but shouldn't stall for weeks.

Examples: technology choice for new feature, project scope expansion requiring one additional month, hiring mid-level position.

High Impact: Consequences affecting organizational strategy, significant resources, or long-term commitments. High-impact decisions require thorough analysis, stakeholder consultation, and executive approval.

Examples: product pivot, technology platform change, partnership agreement, organizational restructuring.

Critical Impact: Consequences affecting organizational survival, major legal/financial risk, or fundamental business model. Critical decisions involve CEO and potentially board approval.

Examples: major acquisition, regulatory compliance failure, business model transformation, executive succession.

Reversibility Dimension​

Easily Reversed: Decisions that can be undone quickly with minimal cost if they prove wrong. Easily-reversed decisions favor experimentation and rapid iteration.

Amazon's "two-way door" decisions—you can walk back through if needed. Bias toward action rather than analysis.

Examples: feature flag activation, A/B test launch, trial software subscription, temporary team structure.

Difficult to Reverse: Decisions requiring significant effort, time, or resources to undo. Difficult-to-reverse decisions warrant more deliberation before committing.

Examples: codebase architectural pattern adoption, hiring permanent employee, long-term vendor contract, product feature public launch.

Irreversible: Decisions that cannot be undone once made. Irreversible decisions demand maximum scrutiny before proceeding. Once committed, the organization lives with consequences regardless of outcome.

Amazon's "one-way door" decisions—there's no walking back. Require thorough analysis and high confidence.

Examples: company acquisition, data deletion, public statement creating legal precedent, fundamental IP licensing decision.

Domain Dimension​

Technical Domain: Decisions about technology, architecture, engineering practices, or technical operations. Technical domain decisions typically route through engineering leadership (Tech Lead → Engineering Manager → CTO).

Examples: programming language choice, infrastructure architecture, testing strategy, technical debt prioritization.

Business Domain: Decisions about products, markets, customers, pricing, or go-to-market strategy. Business domain decisions route through business leadership (Product Lead → Department Head → CEO).

Examples: target market selection, pricing model, feature prioritization, customer segment focus.

Operational Domain: Decisions about processes, policies, resource allocation, or organizational operations. Operational domain decisions route through operational leadership (Team Lead → Department Head → COO/CEO).

Examples: hiring process, budget allocation, policy creation, vendor selection, office policies.

Strategic Domain: Decisions about long-term direction, competitive positioning, organizational mission, or fundamental business model. Strategic domain decisions involve executive team and sometimes board.

Examples: market entry/exit, vision evolution, business model changes, major partnerships, acquisition strategy.

Common Decision Types​

Now explore specific decision types you'll encounter:

Tactical Decisions​

Definition: Day-to-day execution choices within established strategy and process. Tactical decisions implement plans rather than setting direction.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Individual or team
  • Impact: Low to medium
  • Reversibility: Usually easily reversed
  • Authority: Individual contributor or team lead

Examples:

  • Which code pattern to use for specific implementation
  • How to structure meeting agenda
  • Order of task completion within sprint
  • Specific wording of error message
  • Layout of UI component within design system

Approval Requirements: Generally none. Act independently within role boundaries and established patterns.

Escalation Triggers: Escalate when tactical choice conflicts with existing standards, exceeds allocated resources, or affects other teams.

Common Mistakes:

  • Seeking approval for every small choice (analysis paralysis)
  • Making tactical choice that undermines strategic direction
  • Treating non-standard tactical choice as routine when it sets precedent

Operational Decisions​

Definition: Choices about how work gets done—processes, resource allocation, coordination mechanisms, and organizational routines. Operational decisions create the machinery of execution.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Team to department
  • Impact: Medium
  • Reversibility: Difficult to reverse (creates habits and expectations)
  • Authority: Team lead or department head

Examples:

  • Sprint length and cadence
  • Code review process requirements
  • Hiring workflow and interview structure
  • Budget allocation across team projects
  • Meeting schedule and structure
  • Tool selection for team collaboration

Approval Requirements: Team lead approval for team-level operational decisions; department head approval for department-wide changes.

Escalation Triggers: Operational decision affecting multiple teams, requiring significant budget, or changing established company-wide process.

Common Mistakes:

  • Changing operational processes too frequently (creates whiplash)
  • Making unilateral operational changes affecting others
  • Not documenting operational decisions (leads to inconsistency)

Technical Architecture Decisions​

Definition: Choices about technology, system design, integration patterns, or technical platforms. Architecture decisions accumulate into long-term technical strategy.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Varies from team to organizational
  • Impact: Medium to high
  • Reversibility: Difficult to reverse (creates technical debt)
  • Authority: Tech Lead for team-level; CTO for organizational

Examples:

  • Technology stack selection
  • Database architecture design
  • API design patterns
  • Authentication/authorization approach
  • Deployment architecture
  • Testing strategy

Approval Requirements: Tech Lead approval for team-scope architecture; CTO approval for architecture affecting multiple teams or establishing organizational patterns.

Documentation Requirements: Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) capturing context, decision, consequences, and alternatives for significant architecture choices.

Escalation Triggers: Architecture decision with security implications, significant cost, multiple-year commitment, or cross-team impact.

Common Mistakes:

  • Resume-driven development (choosing technologies for learning rather than fit)
  • Not considering operational implications (monitoring, debugging, scaling)
  • Skipping alternatives analysis (first option becomes default)
  • Ignoring team capability (choosing tech team can't support)

Product/Feature Decisions​

Definition: Choices about what to build, which problems to solve, target users, and product direction. Product decisions shape customer value and market positioning.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Team to organizational
  • Impact: Medium to high
  • Reversibility: Varies (feature flags enable easy reversal; public launches are difficult)
  • Authority: Product Lead for features; Department Head/CEO for product direction

Examples:

  • Feature prioritization and roadmap
  • Target user segment definition
  • User experience design choices
  • Feature scope and requirements
  • Product pricing and packaging
  • Deprecation or sunsetting of features

Approval Requirements: Product Lead approval for individual features; Department Head for roadmap shifts; CEO for new product lines or major pivots.

Escalation Triggers: Product decision requiring significant engineering investment, creating competitive risk, or changing product strategy.

Common Mistakes:

  • Building features without validating user need
  • Scope creep transforming small feature into large commitment
  • Not defining success metrics before building
  • Ignoring technical complexity in product decisions

Resource Allocation Decisions​

Definition: Choices about how to deploy limited organizational resources—budget, people, time, equipment. Resource allocation embodies organizational priorities.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Team to organizational
  • Impact: Medium to high
  • Reversibility: Difficult (sunk costs, opportunity costs)
  • Authority: Varies by resource size and type

Examples:

  • Project funding decisions
  • Hiring requisition approvals
  • Equipment and software purchases
  • Team member assignment to projects
  • Marketing budget allocation
  • Conference attendance approval

Approval Requirements: Based on dollar thresholds (see Approval Workflows). Small resources: team lead approval. Large resources: department head or CEO approval.

Escalation Triggers: Resource request exceeding allocated budget, competing requests for scarce resource, or misalignment with strategic priorities.

Common Mistakes:

  • Not considering opportunity cost (what else could these resources fund)
  • Sunk cost fallacy (continuing bad investment because money already spent)
  • Allocating resources without clear success criteria

Policy Decisions​

Definition: Choices establishing rules, guidelines, or standards governing organizational behavior. Policy decisions create boundaries and expectations for everyone.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Organizational (occasionally department)
  • Impact: Medium to high
  • Reversibility: Difficult (creates expectations and habits)
  • Authority: Policy owner for minor changes; executive team for major changes

Examples:

  • Remote work policy
  • Expense reimbursement rules
  • Security requirements and protocols
  • Code quality standards
  • Customer data handling policies
  • Communication guidelines

Approval Requirements: Policy owner approval for clarifications; stakeholder consultation plus executive approval for new policies or major changes.

Escalation Triggers: Policy conflict with legal requirements, employee concerns about fairness, or operational feasibility issues.

Common Mistakes:

  • Creating policy in response to single incident (over-generalization)
  • Not consulting affected stakeholders before implementation
  • Making policies too rigid (no room for judgment)
  • Creating unenforceable policies (undermines all policies)

Strategic Decisions​

Definition: Choices about long-term organizational direction, competitive positioning, market approach, or fundamental business model. Strategic decisions shape what the organization becomes.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Organizational
  • Impact: High to critical
  • Reversibility: Irreversible or very difficult
  • Authority: CEO with executive team input; board for fundamental changes

Examples:

  • Market selection and geographic expansion
  • Product portfolio decisions
  • Business model evolution
  • Strategic partnerships or acquisitions
  • Organizational vision and mission changes
  • Competitive positioning and differentiation

Approval Requirements: CEO approval with executive team consultation; board approval for decisions affecting company fundamentals, requiring major capital, or changing corporate structure.

Documentation Requirements: Comprehensive strategic analysis including market assessment, competitive analysis, financial projections, risk analysis, and implementation roadmap.

Escalation Triggers: Strategic decision with material financial impact, competitive urgency, or stakeholder pressure.

Common Mistakes:

  • Confusing strategic and tactical (strategy is long-term direction; tactics are execution)
  • Changing strategy too frequently (creates whiplash)
  • Making strategic commitments without implementation capacity
  • Not validating strategic assumptions before full commitment

Personnel Decisions​

Definition: Choices about hiring, role changes, compensation, performance management, or organizational structure. Personnel decisions directly affect team members and culture.

Characteristics:

  • Scope: Individual to organizational
  • Impact: Medium to high
  • Reversibility: Difficult and often irreversible
  • Authority: Manager for individual decisions; Department Head/CEO for organizational decisions

Examples:

  • Hiring decisions and job offers
  • Promotions and role changes
  • Compensation adjustments
  • Performance management and terminations
  • Organizational structure changes
  • Team composition and assignments

Approval Requirements: Manager approval for performance feedback; Department Head approval for hiring/promotion/compensation; CEO approval for organizational structure changes.

Escalation Triggers: Personnel decision with legal risk, cultural implications, significant budget impact, or affecting multiple teams.

Common Mistakes:

  • Hiring/promoting too fast without proper evaluation
  • Delaying necessary performance conversations
  • Making personnel decisions based on gut feel rather than evidence
  • Not considering team dynamics and culture fit

Authority Assignment by Decision Type​

Clear mapping from decision types to typical authority holders:

Decision TypeIndividualTeam LeadDept HeadCTO/ExecutiveCEOBoard
Tactical✓✓----
Operational (team)-✓----
Operational (dept)--✓---
Technical (team)-✓----
Technical (org)---✓--
Product (feature)-✓----
Product (roadmap)--✓C--
Resource (<$10K)-✓----
Resource (>$50K)---C✓-
Policy (minor)--✓---
Policy (major)--C✓✓-
Strategic---C✓-
Strategic (fundamental)---IAFinal
Personnel (individual)-✓----
Personnel (org)--CC✓-

Legend: ✓ = Primary authority, C = Consulted, A = Accountable, I = Informed, - = Not typically involved

Decision Authority by Position​

What decisions can each role typically make independently:

Individual Contributor​

Can Decide Independently:

  • Tactical implementation choices within assigned work
  • Personal work schedule (within team norms)
  • Tool choices for individual productivity
  • Task prioritization within assigned scope
  • Communication approach with team members

Requires Approval:

  • Operational changes affecting team
  • Technical choices establishing patterns
  • Resource requests beyond minimal amounts
  • Any decision affecting other teams
  • Deviations from established process

Team Lead​

Can Decide Independently:

  • Team tactical and operational decisions
  • Team-scoped technical choices following organizational patterns
  • Small resource allocation within budget
  • Task assignment within team
  • Team process adjustments (not affecting others)
  • Individual performance feedback
  • Team member coaching and development

Requires Approval:

  • Hiring requisitions
  • Compensation changes
  • Technical architecture affecting multiple teams
  • Budget increases or reallocation
  • Changes to cross-team processes
  • Commitments affecting department roadmap

Department Head​

Can Decide Independently:

  • Department strategy within organizational strategy
  • Department budget allocation
  • Hiring within approved headcount
  • Department policies and processes
  • Cross-team coordination within department
  • Resource prioritization across teams
  • Performance management including terminations (with HR)

Requires Approval:

  • Headcount increases beyond plan
  • Budget increases beyond allocation
  • Technical architecture affecting multiple departments
  • Strategic pivots or new initiatives
  • Organizational policy changes
  • Cross-department resource conflicts

CTO/Executive​

Can Decide Independently:

  • Organizational technical strategy
  • Cross-department technical architecture
  • Technology investments within budget
  • Technical hiring priorities
  • Engineering organizational structure
  • Technical policies and standards
  • Major technology partnerships (with CEO awareness)

Requires Approval:

  • Strategic direction changes
  • Budget increases requiring reallocation
  • Commitments exceeding executive authority
  • Decisions affecting entire organization
  • External communications and announcements
  • Fundamental technical platform changes

CEO​

Can Decide Independently:

  • Organizational strategy within board-approved direction
  • Business model iterations
  • Organizational structure and executive roles
  • Resource allocation across organization
  • External partnerships and commitments
  • Company policies
  • Strategic hiring decisions
  • Budget management within board approvals

Requires Approval (Board):

  • Fundamental business model changes
  • Major acquisitions or capital raises
  • Executive compensation above thresholds
  • Commitments beyond CEO authority limits
  • Changes to company mission/vision
  • Significant risk acceptance beyond normal operations

Decision Type Quick Reference​

When facing a decision, use this quick categorization flow:

Step 1 - Scope Check:

  • Affects only me → Individual scope → Act independently if low impact
  • Affects my team → Team scope → Consult team lead
  • Affects department → Department scope → Requires department head approval
  • Affects organization → Organizational scope → Requires executive approval

Step 2 - Impact Check:

  • Low impact (minor inconvenience) → Less scrutiny needed
  • Medium impact (team productivity, moderate resources) → Standard approval
  • High impact (strategic, significant resources) → Thorough analysis + executive approval
  • Critical impact (survival, major risk) → CEO/Board involvement

Step 3 - Reversibility Check:

  • Easily reversed → Favor speed over analysis
  • Difficult to reverse → Standard deliberation
  • Irreversible → Maximum scrutiny before proceeding

Step 4 - Domain Check:

  • Technical → Route through technical leadership
  • Business → Route through business leadership
  • Operational → Route through operational leadership
  • Strategic → Route through executive/CEO

Step 5 - Authority Check: Based on scope + impact + domain, determine if you have authority or need approval using authority matrix above.

Special Cases and Edge Situations​

Certain decision situations require special handling:

Time-Critical Decisions​

When decisions must be made faster than standard approval processes allow, use emergency decision protocol: act now with best judgment, notify decision authority immediately, submit retroactive approval request within 24 hours, document rationale thoroughly.

Emergency decisions should genuinely be emergencies (system outage, security incident, legal deadline) not manufactured urgency from poor planning.

Cross-Functional Decisions​

When decisions span multiple domains or departments, identify the stakeholder with greatest impact and route through them. If no clear primary stakeholder, escalate to lowest common management level spanning all affected areas.

Cross-functional decisions often need cross-functional RABSIC matrices with multiple Consulted parties.

Precedent-Setting Decisions​

When a "routine" decision could establish organizational precedent for future similar choices, treat it as higher impact than individual instance suggests. Precedent-setting decisions deserve explicit consideration of broader implications.

Example: Approving first remote work exception sets precedent for all future requests; requires policy-level consideration rather than individual accommodation.

Conflict-Creating Decisions​

When making decision that conflicts with previous choice, established policy, or stakeholder expectations, explicitly address the conflict. Either change prior decision/policy or explain why this situation warrants exception.

Unexplained conflicts erode organizational coherence and trust in decision-making.

관련 문서​