Welcome to the TTA Community. TTA Connect is where you can manage and update your profile, search, and view opportunities, manage your work, track payments, and more.
John Laverdure: Alright. Well, let’s get started. Hello, everyone, and welcome. We’re thrilled to have you join us today for what promises to be a powerful and practical session on one of the most overlooked yet critical leadership skills: decision-making.
At TTA, we partner with organizations every day to help build leadership capabilities that truly move the needle, and today’s topic hits the heart of that mission.
It’s my pleasure to introduce our speaker, Chris Seifert. Chris is the founder of Enabling Empowerment and the author of Enabling Empowerment: A Leadership Playbook for Ending Micromanagement and Empowering Decision Makers.
With over 20 years of experience across military leadership, manufacturing operations, and strategic advisory roles, Chris brings a rare blend of practical know-how and transformative thinking. He’s spent his career helping organizations build leadership cultures rooted in trust, accountability, and sound decision-making. His 7-step decision-making framework has become a go-to tool for leaders seeking to reduce risk, accelerate execution, and deliver real business results.
In today’s webinar, Chris will walk us through why decision-making is, in fact, a skill that can be taught, strengthened, and scaled. He’ll also show us how adding structured decision-making to your leadership development programs can create measurable ROI and lasting impact across your organization.
Please join me in welcoming Chris Seifert.
Chris Seifert: All right. Thanks a lot, John. I appreciate the introduction, and welcome, everybody.
That was a great setup—just a little more on my background. I spent the first eight years of my career in the U.S. Navy, in the submarine force. Then I spent about 20 years in operations and manufacturing—oil and gas, chemical—and some time in consulting.
Over the course of my career, I discovered that if I wanted to empower my teams, I needed to help them be better at making decisions. It allowed me to delegate more authority, but it also benefited their development. I eventually developed a specific training and methodology I taught to my teams, and a couple of years ago, I wrote the book Enabling Empowerment that you see on the screen.
As a thank you for joining live, if you’d like a copy of the Kindle or audio version of the book, just type “Kindle” or “Audio” into the chat, and I’ll follow up after this to get you a copy for free.
Now let’s get into the topic: why decision-making training matters—and specifically, how you can demonstrate ROI when you include it in leadership development.
Jerry Walker: You’re welcome.
Chris Seifert: Good, I see some responses coming in. We’ll give it a minute or two.
And I think Jerry dropped the link in the chat too. Thanks, Jerry.
If you’re still trying to join, remember you can use the QR code, text message, or website link.
Let’s go ahead and try a second question just to make sure it’s working. Do you see the codes now?
Jerry Walker: No, I don’t see the QR code.
Chris Seifert: It’s showing on my screen—it was showing earlier, of course, now it’s not working for everyone. But a few of you are in.
Let me type it in again. Open your texting app, text the number 22333, and type:
CSEIFERT705
That should get you in. Looks like more people are getting it now. You can then just pick A or B for your responses.
Okay, great. Let’s keep going.
Here’s what we’re going to cover today:
As a former VP of Operations, I’ve been in the position of crafting training programs for emerging leaders and needing to justify every dollar spent. Executives would ask, “What are we getting back for this?” I’ll show you how to structure this training to literally calculate ROI and present it back to your leadership team.
Let’s start with some real-world examples—three case studies where great companies with great leaders made terrible decisions:
Blockbuster: In the 1990s, Blockbuster was booming—thousands of stores, millions of customers, and skyrocketing stock prices. Around 2000, a small company called Netflix came along with a DVD-by-mail service. Blockbuster had the opportunity to buy Netflix for $50 million—and they passed. Today, Netflix is one of the world’s leading media companies. Blockbuster has one store left in Washington.
Kodak: Kodak is best known for film. But in the 1970s, Kodak actually invented the digital camera. Then they buried the technology, fearing it would cannibalize their core business. Instead of becoming the leader in digital photography, they hesitated—and competitors took over. Kodak eventually filed for bankruptcy.
New Coke: In response to Pepsi’s popularity in blind taste tests, Coke did their own research and found that yes, people preferred Pepsi. So they reformulated Coke and launched “New Coke.” It also outperformed Classic Coke in blind taste tests. But emotionally, people were attached to the original flavor, and the backlash was fierce. It’s now considered one of the biggest marketing flops of all time.
These were not dumb people. They had data. They were trying to do the right thing—but they still made bad decisions.
You might say, “Well, Chris, those are executive-level decisions.” Fair. But your frontline and mid-level leaders are making dozens—if not hundreds—of decisions every day. Whether it’s handling a customer issue, solving a production problem, or making pricing calls, these decisions affect business outcomes. If we’re not training people how to make those decisions, we’re leaving success to chance.
The higher you go in leadership, the broader your decision-making impact becomes. Yet, we don’t treat decision-making like a skill. We assume people will learn it through experience. That’s risky, and it can be costly.
We also don’t teach decision-making in school. Engineering, HR, business—all those programs teach technical skills. They don’t teach how to navigate business uncertainty or complexity.
Compounding this issue, our brains aren’t hardwired for good business decisions. Cognitive biases and mental shortcuts often lead us astray.
Let’s explore some of those traps.
Chris Seifert: Let’s look at a few examples of how our brains can lead us to faulty conclusions.
Example 1: The Framing Trap Here’s a question: How do you pronounce the capital of Kentucky? Is it “Louisville” or “Lou-ee-ville”?
Most people start debating the pronunciation. But the correct answer is… neither. The capital of Kentucky is Frankfort. The question was framed in a way that tricked you into choosing between two incorrect options. That’s the framing trap—how a question is presented can limit the way we think about it.
Example 2: Base Rate Neglect Meet Ronald. He’s described as reserved and definitely an introvert. Is he more likely to be a librarian or a salesman?
Most people say librarian. It fits the stereotype. But statistically, there are vastly more salespeople than librarians—likely by a factor of 1,000 to 1. So even if only a small percentage of salespeople are introverts, the odds still favor Ronald being a salesperson. This is base rate neglect—our tendency to ignore statistical reality in favor of a mental shortcut.
Example 3: Confirmation Bias If I Google, “Are dogs better than cats?” I’ll get one set of results. If I Google, “Are cats better than dogs?” I’ll get another. Our brains naturally search for information that confirms what we already believe. This is confirmation bias—and it affects everything from hiring decisions to product launches.
Example 4: Law of Small Numbers A study on kidney cancer incidence across 3,141 counties in the U.S. found something striking. The lowest rates of kidney cancer were mostly in rural, sparsely populated, Republican-leaning counties. That could prompt headlines like “Clean Country Living Prevents Cancer!”
But here’s the twist: the same study found that the highest rates of kidney cancer were also in those same rural counties. Why? Because of their small population sizes. One or two cases dramatically skew the statistics. This is the law of small numbers—mistaking variability for meaningful patterns.
These are just a few of the “decision traps” that even smart, experienced people fall into all the time.
Now, let’s talk about what’s happening in our brains that causes this.
System 1 vs. System 2 Thinking
When I show you a picture of an angry person, you immediately think, “She looks upset. She’s going to yell at me.” That reaction is automatic and effortless. That’s your System 1 thinking—fast, intuitive, emotional, and based on pattern recognition.
Now, if I show you the equation 17 × 24, you instantly recognize it as math—but solving it takes effort. You’d pause, think, maybe even grab a calculator. That’s System 2 thinking—slow, analytical, and effortful.
Here’s the catch: your brain prefers to operate in System 1 because it’s efficient. But efficiency comes at a cost. It relies on mental shortcuts that aren’t always accurate. When we face unfamiliar, complex, or high-stakes decisions, those shortcuts can lead to poor outcomes.
Let’s test this. Look at the letters on the screen: A, B, C. Now look at the numbers: 12, 13, 14.
You probably didn’t notice that the B and the 13 are the exact same symbol. Your brain used context to decide how to interpret it. That’s System 1 filling in the gaps.
Another example: “A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?”
Most people say 10 cents. But that would make the bat $1.10, and the total $1.20. The correct answer is 5 cents. Again, System 1 rushed to a conclusion. Only by slowing down and checking the math with System 2 can we get it right.
Chris Seifert (continued): System 1 makes quick, automatic decisions based on pattern and intuition. System 2 is slower, more deliberate, and checks the work—but it’s lazy. Unless we intentionally engage System 2, we default to shortcuts.
This is why training your leaders to recognize these traps matters. You can’t completely override System 1—but you can equip people to know when to pause, ask questions, and slow down the thinking process.
So what do we do with this knowledge?
First, we can train people to recognize these traps. Studies show that even a single training session can make people 30% less likely to fall for the same trap again.
Second, we can teach a structured decision-making process to guide leaders through complex, high-impact decisions. That’s where frameworks come in.
Chris Seifert: Let’s talk about how we move from theory to action—specifically, how to teach and apply a structured decision-making framework.
Here’s the framework I use. It’s been developed over 20 years and taught to thousands of professionals. It’s designed for decisions that involve complexity or uncertainty, and it includes seven steps:
One key thing: we document the decision. Why? Because of hindsight bias—the tendency to forget what we actually knew when we made the decision. Documenting helps us reflect, adjust, and improve future decisions.
Now, how is this different from what you might find if you Googled “decision-making process”?
Most of those frameworks say something like:
Sounds good—but in practice, that leads to analysis paralysis. I’ve seen it. Teams spend a month collecting data without knowing what really matters.
My approach is different. We start by asking: What are the two or three variables that matter most in this decision? We focus the analysis on those.
Also, we don’t give fixed estimates. We use ranges. Instead of saying, “This project will have a 15% ROI,” we say, “It will likely fall between 10% and 20%, depending on X and Y.” That invites collaboration instead of debate.
Creating ROI with Decision-Making Training
Let’s talk about results. How can this training generate return on investment?
Here’s how I recommend implementing it in your organization:
Here’s what happens: Leaders say “yes” to real, thoughtful proposals they would not have otherwise considered. You go from classroom training to business action. That’s ROI.
You’ve now created measurable business value because of the training.
Free Resources
There are several ways you can get access to this training:
There’s a financial modeling tool, tip sheets for pre-mortems, and templates to help with framing problems—all available to you and your teams.
Q&A Segment
Jerry Walker: Chris, we had a question from Latosh Alexander: “How do you make this information transferable for higher education?”
Chris Seifert: Great question. The training is designed for people who don’t have an MBA—but want to make strong business decisions. That said, I’d be happy to explore how to integrate this into a higher ed curriculum.
If you’re a university professor or run an academic program, I can work with you to adapt it to your course. Also, if you want to put this training into your institution’s LMS, we can do that too.
Question: “How does this framework integrate with psychological safety?”
Chris Seifert: Important point. One of the key things I’ve learned from delivering this training is that people often feel embarrassed when they’re told they’ve fallen into a bias or a trap. So I frame it differently.
This isn’t about calling someone biased. It’s about showing them that everyone’s brain works this way. These shortcuts—confirmation bias, hindsight bias, framing—they’re not flaws. They’re natural and usually helpful. But they can backfire in complex situations.
By teaching the neuroscience behind it, we normalize the conversation. We make it safe. It’s not “you made a dumb decision.” It’s “your brain did what it’s built to do—let’s learn how to recognize that and adjust.”
That’s how this supports psychological safety.
Chris Seifert: To recap:
Thanks again for joining. I hope this session was valuable and actionable. And I’d love to continue the conversation with anyone who wants to go deeper into decision-making as a leadership skill.
Thanks again—and take care.
