Why executive decision makers don’t make decisions.
Debbie Morrison • September 16, 2020
Why executive decision makers don’t make decisions.
As specialist executive recruiters for almost 25 years, it’s one of the most common frustrations we still hear from employers. Why are so many executive decision makers reluctant to actually make decisions?
The logic is simple enough. After all, when you’re recruited into a senior decision-making position, it’s only natural you’ll be expected to make decisions. Trouble is, every day managers all over Australia – and the world – struggle to actually do it, putting things off for all manner of reasons and generally erring on the side of procrastination and compromise. Even at a micro level, managerial indecision like this can have a significant impact on the bottom line. But when you extrapolate it to an entire economy, well, the impact is potentially seismic.
One problem. Many causes.
A raft of factors can trigger a lack of confident decision making in a workplace. In some instances, it might be personality related, something which can have ramifications all the way back to your executive recruitment, talent identification and HR processes. While in other situations it can be connected to external forces such as the working environment or corporate culture managers find themselves operating within each day.
While clearly every situation is different, here are some of the more common factors to watch out for if you’re looking to encourage more effective decision-making in your business. It can be particularly important to keep these things in mind when you’re actively looking to recruit new talent through an executive search process.
- Failing to prioritise or delegate correctly – no matter how good a decision-maker may be, they can’t decide everything every time. Whether it’s done intuitively, or they’ve learned strategies to help them over the years, the most effective managers are typically adept at prioritising what they really need to take care of themselves – and delegating what they don’t to others.
- Too much information – when we get overloaded it’s easy for our decision making to become bogged down as we struggle to process everything. The reality is too many options and opinions can be just as dangerous as not having enough. While it’s easy to assume that if we go through every conceivable scenario, and leave no stone unturned, we’ll be certain to make the right decision, more often than not we simply become overwhelmed. It’s why one of the greatest managerial skills lies in being able to filter the information you really need from that which is superfluous.
- Uncertainty – in managerial circles the phrase ‘paralysis by over-analysis’ often draws a chuckle. But make no mistake, it can be crippling commercial problem if left unaddressed. Regardless of the business size or industry, the underlying cause is almost always the same: a lack of confidence and/or clarity within the business. Maybe a manager is fearful of losing his or her job if they make the ‘wrong’ call? Perhaps they don’t feel truly empowered and, as a result, are constantly seeking to second-guess their boss? Or maybe they’re wheel spinning as don’t fully understand the company’s strategy and vision? They’re all paralysing scenarios for a decision maker, slowing down the process at best, grinding it to a complete halt at worst. Uncertainty is the enemy of effective and efficient decision making.
- The emotion of change – generally speaking, people don’t like change. Yet by its very nature, change is what decision making is all about. Whether it’s implementing new structures, new IT systems, new hires, new suppliers or even a new marketing campaign, the decision-making process is frequently more emotional that it might appear on the surface – both for the person making the decisions and also those who will be affected by them. For some managers this can create a heavy emotional burden which, in turn, can lead to procrastination and/or compromises which may not be in the long-term interests of the business.
Australia’s health, wellness, and supplements sector isn’t just growing. It’s exploding. From functional drinks to adaptogenic gummies, wellness brands have gone from niche to mainstream in record time. The industry is now worth over $5.6 billion, up from $4.7 billion in 2020 — a 19% growth in just three years. IBISWorld projects continued expansion with a CAGR of 5.3% through 2028. But behind the glossy packaging and influencer campaigns, something else is happening: the regulators have arrived. And most wellness brands? They’re underprepared. From Trend to Target The boom brought founders, fitness coaches, nutritionists, and marketing entrepreneurs into the supplement space. What many built was impressive. But what most forgot was how fast wellness moves from enthusiasm to enforcement. With more than 40 infringement notices and administrative sanctions in Q1 alone, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) strengthened enforcement of the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code in early 2024. Prominent companies were named in public. Soon after, the ACCC revised its guidelines for influencer marketing disclosures and launched a campaign against the use of pseudoscientific terminology in product marketing. TGA head Professor Anthony Lawler noted in March 2024: “We’re seeing an unacceptably high level of non-compliance, particularly around unsubstantiated therapeutic claims.” In short: credibility is the new battleground. Why Sales-First Leadership is Failing Too many brands are still led by executives whose playbooks were built on community engagement, retail hustle, and Instagram fluency. That got them early traction. But it won’t keep them compliant — or protect them from an investor exodus when the lawsuits begin. The biggest risks now are not formulation errors. They’re: Claims breaches Compliance negligence Advertising missteps Unqualified health endorsements Reputational collapse through regulatory exposure And these aren’t theoretical. The TGA pulled 197 listed medicines from the market in 2023 alone — a 42% increase on the previous year — due to non-compliant claims or sponsor breaches. What the Next Wellness Leader Looks Like This is where many boards and founders face a difficult transition. The next generation of leadership in wellness isn’t defined by hustle. It’s defined by: Deep regulatory fluency Cross-functional commercial leadership (eComm, retail, pharma, FMCG) Reputation management under pressure Ability to scale with scrutiny, not just speed The leadership profiles now needed aren’t coming out of marketing agencies — they’re coming out of pharmaceuticals, healthtech, and functional food. They’ve sat on regulatory committees. They’ve built compliance-first commercial strategies. They understand how to win trust, not just impressions. Yes, this might feel like a shift away from the founder-led energy that made these brands exciting. But it’s not about slowing down. It’s about making sure you’re still standing when the music stops. Where the Gaps Are The underlying problem isn’t just non-compliance. It's immaturity in structural leadership. The majority of wellness brands haven't developed: An accountable governance structure; a scalable compliance architecture; a risk-aware marketing culture; and any significant succession planning beyond the founder. In fact, a 2023 survey by Complementary Medicines Australia found that only 22% of wellness businesses had dedicated compliance leadership at executive level, and just 14% had formal succession plans in place. This isn’t sustainable — not at scale, and certainly not under scrutiny. Final Thought The wellness boom isn’t over. But the rules have changed. Rapid growth is no longer enough. The brands that win from here will be those with: A compliance culture baked in Leadership teams built for complexity A board that sees regulation not as a barrier, but a brand advantage Those who don’t? They could be one audit away from crisis.
Australia’s meat sector is facing a leadership vacuum. Explore the hidden crisis behind staffing, succession, and ESG risk in food manufacturing.