If you've decided to work in business, your first instinct is probably to work in a company that you know the name of. Because a lot of others think the same way, you'll find that some very smart people work for these companies. The strange thing you may discover is that these large groups of smart people can do things en masse that are, well, not so smart.

Why is that?

Here it is: groups of people aren't great at making decisions.

Let's say that we are deciding something by consensus, and we're going to a meeting to do it. Here are some of the problems we might have:

• People have an idea of what the goal is, but noone is completely sure.
• There might be more than one goal, and the list might include things that are and aren't important.
• You go in, taking the list of carry-ons from last meeting that noone resolved, and talk about them instead.
• The process of how to solve it is not well defined. For example, the method for solving a simple calculus problem is well defined, but the method for writing a good poem is not. Therefore, people can legitimately argue about what the best way to get there is. People do have respect for those with experience, but it's not a panacea.
• There's not much data around - either we haven't dug it out, or it just doesn't exist. Less data means less clarity around the decision.
• Anyone in the group can get as involved as they like - they can get passionate and bang the table, or spend the meeting picking their nose. They decide their level of involvement based on how important the topic appears to be, how busy they are and what mood they're in at the moment.

Fighting

What about fighting it out? Let's say that there's disagreement with the idea proposed by X. For this to work, everyone must be able to separate dislike of X's business idea from dislike of X. In smaller groups, there is usually more trust, and this becomes more feasible. But in larger groups and larger companies, you might be working with people you don't know, and it's hard not to take things personally.

Most people tend to avoid conflict. They are afraid of upsetting anyone, and they want to be agreeable. That can lead to problems when decisions are made.

• The group tends towards not changing the way things are done.
• The group puts off making a decision until later, so the same issue keeps cropping up.
• The group chooses a compromise decision that isn't one thing or the other, but is a combination that is more ineffective than both.
• One way of doing this is to do things the way they've always been done.
• This effect is even stronger with big decisions.

Case in point - the Edsel.

In fact, the grille ended up looking like a female body part that shall not be named - a compromise choice that ended up being way worse that what either party wanted.

Now tell us something we don't know

I hope that you'll recognise some of these problems. They're not going to go away, but there are certainly a bunch of things you can do to help. Remember that most people like to avoid conflict, and you can use this to try and get your way.

• Know more about a decision than anyone else. If you have more knowledge and data, that's hard to combat with opinion. Beat them down with facts.
• If you want control or authority over something, realise that some people just don't want to do work. Instead, they're happy to let you at it.
• If you want control but you don't want authority over something, you can give away status in return for the ability to do the work. Remember that some people are more concerned with looking good than doing the work. Use that.
• Be persistent. If you have kids, you're probably familiar with them nagging you for something, and in the end, it probably works. You can do this too - just nag and nag until you get your way. Bring up your issue meeting after meeting. Be careful that you don't damage your rep doing this - but it's possible.
• Bear in mind that over time, the participants in the meeting and the environment change, and you may end up getting your way all the same. If you proposed cost cutting measures, the exact same point might be far better received now compared to last year.
• Similarly, as well as repeating one issue over and over, you can overload the process with proposals. This is similar to the "can I have a million pounds" "no" "can I have a fiver" negotiation that kids use. If even one of your proposals gets through, you won.
• Make smaller changes instead of larger ones

Be sneaky and use the meeting mood to help you.

• Keep the first agenda item unimportant, as it will receive disproportionate attention.
• Conversely, you can slip stuff in toward the end of a meeting when everyone is bored and wants to go home.

If you have an item that just looks ugly to everyone else, and you want to get your way, there are definitely things you can do to help.

• Divert attention away from the ugly parts and onto something nicer but less relevant.
• Make small changes instead of big ones. For example, instead of changing what you do in a situation, propose a change in formatting or calculation of a metric that drives that change.

I saved the most evil to last - make sure you write the meeting minutes. I'm not suggesting that you misrepresent what happened during a meeting, but you can adjust its tone to suit you. Use caution and remain ethical!