The reason why some school administrators make better decisions than others comes down to their outlook on themselves and others in a work environment, their view on roles the people play in that environment, how good a thinker and communicator they really are, and whether or not they act with integrity. Another critical element that separates an effective administrator from an ineffective one is his or her ability to avoid certain traps that can go with the job.

In answering this question, it is important to look at administrator behaviors and attitudes that lead to either good decision-making or poor decision-making processes. In my mind, the simplest way to make this determination is to consider whether an administrator acts like a "boss" or as a "leader."
Bosses drive subordinates; leaders coach them. Bosses depend on authority; leaders on goodwill. Bosses say, "I;" leaders say, "We." Bosses fix the blame for the breakdown; leaders fix the breakdown. Bosses say, "Here's what I think;" leaders say, "What do you think?" Bosses expect people to work for them; leaders expect people to work with them. Bosses want things done their way; leaders want thing done the best way. Bosses inflict pain; leaders share pain. Bosses take more than their share of the credit; leaders take more than their share of the blame.

Olayinka Alege

Few administrators have totally mastered the social and political dynamic of decision making, but where most people go wrong in the process is usually due to poor data analysis, lack of an appreciation for divergent thinking, and being inflexible to views that differ from one's own. Poor decision-making almost always results when candor, conflict, and debate is conspicuously absent during the decision-making process. In this scenario, people feel uncomfortable expressing dissent, groups converge quickly on a particular solution, and individuals assume that unanimity exists when, in fact, it does not. As a result, critical assumptions remain untested, and creative alternatives do not surface or receive adequate attention. Better to embrace divergent thinking in the decision-making process. There is a natural tendency for all administrators (including myself) to converge pretty quickly on either one option or a small set of fairly similar options.

One of the principles that I use to help me out of this dilemma is to decide how best to decide, rather than just diving in to solve a problem. I like to take a step back, look at the landscape and say "who do I really need around this table? What kind of climate do I want to create? What kind of ground rules do I want to have for how we're going to interact? How will I constructively encourage divergent thinking within the group?

In my experience, good decision making also means avoiding certain traps that all administrators face at one point or another in the process. I've developed my own checklist of questions that I ask myself before committing to any major decision as a superintendent: (1) confirmation bias - when I look for information do I often just gather data to confirm what I already believe?; (2) recency effect - instead of thinking about the whole range of past experience, do I allow a very recent vivid event color my perception of the future?; (3) honest feedback - did people tell me what they really think, or were they afraid to speak their minds?; (4) expediency - am I trying to make a decision in a hurry without good data (a.k.a. hip shoot)?; (5) analysis-paralysis - instead of moving too quickly, am I taking too long to make a decision by over-thinking the problem?; and (6) assumptions - am I making a decision based on little or no data, or worse, erroneous assumptions?