Published on | Prototyping: From UX to Front End — Medium Jon Brick

At BMNT, we help defense organizations solve national security problems through best practices from Silicon Valley. One of the tools is the Google Ventures Sprint. I won’t go over what a Sprint is but if you need a refresher you can read more at Google Ventures’s Sprint website, or purchase the book online (every designer should have this book). Editorial Note: The opinions of this post are solely my own and do not reflect the opinions of BMNT, Google Ventures, or any other affiliated organizations.

For those of you who have run Sprints or participated in them in the past, you are well aware that they are huge investment for any team. They require time, resources, and focus throughout the duration of an entire week. In addition to the physical stress, there’s an emotional one as well. Personally, I always have this weird combination of hope and despair throughout the entire process.

Me and my ideas during a Sprint

Recently, I ran a Sprint for a client that was by far the most challenging Sprint I’ve been a part of. After hours of reflection, multiple internal team discussions, and rereading the Sprint book end-to-end (twice), I have come to the following conclusion: Two Deciders are a huge issue when they have different motivations.

“Two Deciders are a huge issue when they have different motivations.”

In this post, I’m going to share from my experience why having two Deciders causes major problems and what you can do to prevent or overcome these issues.

⚠️ Is this really a problem?

It’s important to acknowledge that a big value add of running a Sprint is bringing cross-functional experts from all over an organization into one room to work on a problem. Each participant fits an archetype, whether it be engineering, design, marketing, or sales. Yet of all these archetypes, the most critical to the success of the Sprint is the Decider. Who is the Decider? Well, that depends on your team and the problem you’re trying to tackle. Here’s how the Google Ventures team defines the role:

“Who makes decisions for your team? Perhaps it’s the CEO, or maybe it’s just the “CEO” of this particular project. If she can’t join for the whole time, make sure she makes a couple of appearances and delegates a Decider (or two) who can be in the room at all times.”

– Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days, p. 34

I like to frame the Decider as the quarterback. Other team members are critical to the success of the Sprint, but ultimately it is the Decider that is calling the shots. It can certainly be daunting to be the one responsible for making decisions for the team at critical moments. Luckily, the activities of the Sprint help Deciders make sound decisions quickly, with the help of the participants input. Unluckily, a lot of those activities do not factor in having two Deciders.

Why is having two Deciders a bad idea, you might ask? Below, I’ve listed out some of the ways I’ve seen these challenges manifest*. I’ve categorized these challenges as Risks that either hinder the speed of the process or the effectiveness of the group.

Reenactment of me asking two Deciders anything

*If you are currently in the middle of a workshop with two Deciders, I suggest you scroll straight to bottom and reference the “If All Else Fails” section.

Risks to Speed

Taking more time to make decisions. This hurts momentum.
Needing more time outside of the schedule to discuss concerns. This screws up your daily schedule.
Talking just for self-validation. People feel the need to talk just for the sake of talking. It’s unproductive.
Raising more questions than answers. Sometimes Deciders need to ask questions to make decisions. Two deciders means more questions.

Risks to Effectiveness

Getting defensive if one Decider’s decision is favored over another’s. If the Deciders have different motivations, there’s a huge risk to finding an agreement. Read up on Cognitive Biases for this.
Having open disagreements. It’s really important to keep morale and momentum high when running a Sprint. Having two people clearly not agree on a solution really crushes the confidence of the group.
Dumbing down a great idea. I have seen it happen where people combine two ideas into one, creating a mediocre idea instead of an ambitious and impactful one.

These risks might not happen if you run a Sprint with two deciders, but I’m calling them out because they are more likely to occur if you do. Personally, I listed these risks after my last Sprint as ammunition in case my client ever asked me, “Why can’t we run a Sprint with two Deciders?” I suggest you keep them handy in case it happens to you too.

The voice inside my head when someone brings up two Deciders.

👷 Mitigation Tactics

Let’s assume you agree with the risks of having two Deciders, but still opt to run a Sprint with two Deciders anyway. That’s totally fine (good luck)! Here are some tactics to help you execute by focusing on things to do before the Sprint, on Day 1, and ongoing.

Prior to the Design Sprint

Be absolutely sure you need two Deciders, then make a plan. You’ve looked at the risks and you’re charging forward anyway. Be sure you have noted the potential pitfalls and have ways to mitigate them.
Make the Deciders have an open and honest dialogue. Get both Deciders in the room (or on the phone) and talk through their expectations and those of their respective stakeholders. Talking about desired outcomes seems to generate a lot more conversation. It’s your job to identify any conflicting goals and motivations.
Find out which Decider is going to fund the solution. It’s important to understand internal politics before getting into the Sprint itself. In my experience, the Decider whose budget will be affected by the solutions proposed in the Sprint is the true sponsor. If you want to have your solution implemented, you’re going to need that Decider’s final approval at the end of the Sprint.
Lay the ground rules for the Deciders. Explain the expectations of being a Decider as outlined in the Sprint book. I literally read excerpts of the Sprint book to people. Also, walk them through each day and give them a clear idea of what decisions they’ll be expected to make. Remind the Deciders that if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.

Set expectations on Day 1

Set the stage for the entire team on the morning of Day 1. Be sure to explain what a Sprint is (and what it isn’t) to all participants and what you’re hoping to deliver by the end of the week. Don’t forget to include introductions for the team and explain to The Why for each member being included. I also like to acknowledge the Deciders and explain how they will be involved at specific points throughout the week.
Use visual aids to give participants new mental models. This is actually a good tactic for all Sprints you run. I find using a whiteboard to give people visual representations is really helpful. For example, when I’m explaining criteria for dot voting I like to go over a concept I call the law of averages. Combining two ideas together might help create a safe bet, but a Sprint is all about testing our wildest ideas! I push people look for ideas that would have the single greatest impact, and recognize that sometimes combining two ideas together you lose what made that idea special in the first place.

“…a Sprint is all about testing our wildest ideas!”

A visual I use to show how a combined idea might not be as inspirational as a single idea.

Explain that decisions need to be made but no ideas will be lost. In addition to walking the group through each day, I also specifically call out where in the process the Decider will be weighing in for their final vote. I also explain that, regardless of whose ideas are chosen, we will capture all of the ideas and tangential topics and keep those in a Parking Lot easel sheet or side whiteboard. This way nothing is lost, it’s just not a topic we’re going to pursue as a group at this time.

During the Sprint

Explain “The Why” of each activity to the group. Starting with why and providing context helps the participants go from activity to activity. It’s also important for both Deciders to understand the mindset that the participants have when generating ideas.
Take breaks. Taking breaks will help you meet with Deciders separately throughout the week. I like to schedule time before each day, during lunch, and at the end of the day. Deciders might be operating under unspoken biases and assumptions while you’re leading the group. It’s best to expose those ideas apart from the larger team so as to avoid hurting momentum.
Write the schedule for each day on the whiteboard. Keep conversations on time as much as possible. Use the framework of the Sprint as a constraint. It will force the Deciders to have courage to make challenging decisions and keep morale high by having people make progress.

If all else fails…

Take a deep breath. If you’re reading this and you’re in the middle of a Sprint that is starting to go off the rails, take a deep breath, get some distance from the group, and get some fresh air. I take advantage of the breaks as much as the participants. Sometimes find that just getting some sunlight helps me recharge. Oh, and revisit the Sprint Book during your breaks if you need it!
Use the timer to the next activity as expediently as possible. When you know what needs to be done each activity and each day, you can start to create an action plan to get people moving in the right direction. There have been multiple Sprints where I’ll just set off the timer arbitrarily to cut off side banter and get the group back on track. Most times the Decider is the culprit!
Create milestones to achieve by the end of the day. Everyone likes working towards a goal. If you’re stuck in the middle of the day (or starting the day), write out what needs to get done between now and the end of the day on an easel sheet or whiteboard. I’ll tell the team, “We need to get these things done before we leave today.” Don’t be afraid to talk to the Deciders separately and ask them, “How can we knock out this list? What needs to happen?” Get everyone working on your side.
Fake it ‘til you make it. Take comfort that this process has been done hundreds of times across a variety of organizations, big and small. We put up a few Sprint Rules at the beginning of every workshop, one of which is to Trust The Process. This is as much a reminder for me running the Sprint as it is for the participants. Things will get messy but you have to keep pushing on. Personally, I have seen creative and amazing prototypes come through in the final hours on Day 5. The key is to stick with the process and not alter it when the going gets tough.

All of us at the end of Day 5.

💭 Final Thoughts

In conclusion, avoiding having two Deciders is the safest way to ensure the participants in your Sprint can make confident decisions and quickly move from activity to activity. However, if your project requires that you include two Deciders in the Design Sprint, ensure their motivations and objectives are the same. If those motivations are conflicting, try to distinguish one as the primary Decider, based on whose budget will be affected most. Finally, if they absolutely must be on equal footing, do your best to communicate before, during, and after the workshop and trust the Sprint process.

Good luck!

Further Reading

Sprint — How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days

Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days

Design Sprint Kit

Design Sprint Kit

Did I miss anything? I’d love to hear from you in the comments below.

Find us at BMNT.com

Find me on Twitter or LinkedIn

Special thanks to Jillian Pfund, Justine Cook, and Zac Halbert for helping to edit!

Design Sprint Lessons: Challenges from having two Deciders and how to mitigate was originally published in Prototypr on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Design Sprint Lessons: Challenges from having two Deciders and how to mitigate

Cool stuff, every week

More Articles