INTHEBLACK December 2025 / January 2026 - Magazine - Page 42
“Typically, what we suggest is starting with smaller
decisions on everyday problems. Supervisors notice when
someone consistently makes good decisions — it builds
trust and strengthens their case for promotion.”
F E AT U R E
CATHERINE SIMONS CPA, WSC GROUP
A recent McKinsey study found that high-quality
team debates led to decisions that were 2.3 times
more likely to be successful.
At Deloitte, Fraillon uses a Business Chemistry
framework to make sure people from different
backgrounds and personalities are included
in decision-making.
“When you have robust conversations with
diverse perspectives, you end up with a far
stronger decision than if you had a room full
of people who all think the same.”
BE RELIABLE
Catherine Simons CPA, managing director of
professional services firm WSC Group, says that
consistent decision-making is a defining quality for
finance professionals aiming to advance their careers.
“People don’t judge you by the best decision
you’ve ever made,” she says. “They judge you on
your baseline and what they can reliably expect from
you day in and day out.
“If you can demonstrate that your decision-making
is consistent and fair across a range of situations,
people learn to trust that,” she says.
When it comes to junior staff members, Simons
adds that a solutions-oriented mindset is often what
sets one individual apart from another.
“Typically, what we suggest is starting with smaller
decisions on everyday problems,” says Simons.
“Supervisors notice when someone consistently makes
good decisions — it builds trust and strengthens their
case for promotion.”
AVOID PEOPLE-PLEASING
New or inexperienced leaders often feel pressure
to keep everyone happy, says Gordon.
“It is really easy to confuse doing what individuals
want with doing what is best for the organisation.”
To avoid people-pleasing, he suggests having
early conversations with key stakeholders about
42 INTHEBLACK Dec 2025/Jan 2026 SPECIAL EDITION
how the decision will be made. “If someone from the
outside says, ‘Look, Paul, you look a bit uncomfortable
with this decision’, you’ll probably take yourself out
of the decision-making process,” he explains.
“Instead of asking what people think, ask them
what factors about this decision impact them,”
he says. That way, you focus less on approval and
more on getting useful input.
USE AI, DON’T RELY ON IT
Artificial intelligence (AI) can be a helpful tool
in decision-making, but it is not a replacement
for human judgement.
“A lot of younger professionals go straight to AI
tools like ChatGPT for tactical answers,” explains
Fraillon. But relying too heavily on AI can mean
missing out on developing the “deeper thinking
skills needed for strategic, big-picture decisions”.
Agentic AI can now make data-backed
organisational decisions and set goals. While that
might sound efficient, Gordon warns against handing
over our thinking to AI.
“I encourage people to use AI to help with
the decision process, but not to take the decisionmaking away.”
The real danger, he says, is losing agency. “As
leaders, we want to take accountability for the decisions
that we make.” It may be faster to use technology,
but the responsibility should stay with humans.
UTILISE FOUR CORE PRINCIPLES
When a high-stakes decision needs to be made,
Gordon recommends relying on four core principles.
The first is process.
“Make sure you have a decision process before you
make a decision,” he says. Even a simple, agreed way of
thinking through the issue can help bring order to chaos.
Second, apply academic rigour. That does not mean
needing a PhD, but instead having well-reasoned
thinking behind the choice.
