The Importance of 'Being Decisive' in Decision-Making and 'Not Being Decisive' in Scientific Discussion

Today's work was quite tough.
A meeting with over 15 people, and one where we had to think about everything from identifying issues to concrete actions.

Naturally, everyone has different opinions, so it's hard to summarize them.
In the end, we managed to reach a conclusion, but it was quite forced.

Personally, I don't like being a meeting facilitator in the first place.
It is a daunting task to listen to various opinions from here and there and summarize them nicely.
After it's over, I can't move for about 30 minutes.

Also, in meeting situations like this, it is important to 'be decisive'.
However, I am not good at being decisive by nature, and in the first place, I rarely make definitive statements in everyday scientific discussions.

So I am always struggling in meetings.
Today is about that.

In science, one rarely 'makes definitive statements'

I have worked as a research and development professional at a company for nearly 10 years.
And I am still in charge of projects related to research and development.

In such research and development, we consider the mechanisms hidden behind phenomena from experimental data and the like, and form hypotheses.
However, there is no way to find 'laws that can be used in any situation' from experimental results under limited conditions.

For example, even if you look at the phenomenon that 'water boils when it reaches 100°C', you cannot say definitively that 'water always boils at 100°C'.
You think about exceptions, such as what happens on top of a high mountain.

That is how the explanation becomes one with a preface, such as 'water boils at 100°C at an atmospheric pressure of 1013 hectopascals'.
But this 'preface' is important when thinking scientifically.

If you form a 'widely applicable hypothesis' from experiments conducted with limited raw materials, materials, and conditions, you might be mistaken.
Perhaps a misunderstanding could cause a terrible accident.

Therefore, when making scientific reports, 'preface words' are inevitably attached, and there are times when I cannot make a definitive statement.
Rather, it is better not to give strange misunderstandings if you say honestly, 'I think it holds true within this range'.

In this way, it has become natural for me 'not to make definitive statements'.

In decision-making, 'being decisive' leads to what follows

On the other hand, in the last few years, as I have taken on a project manager-like position, I have been managing meetings more often.
Moreover, the agenda items are things like 'what is the most important issue right now' or 'what should we do in the future'.
It has become not a science talk at all.

And what is important is that the goals are set, such as 'identifying issues' or 'deciding on actions'.
Therefore, I cannot just say, 'I don't really know yet, the end'.

When making a decision at the end after having a discussion, decisiveness is tested.
And when making a decision, it is important to 'be decisive'.

For example, when deciding on actions for the next month, what if someone said, 'I feel like if we move with this, it will probably work out somehow'?
Most people would think, 'Will it really work out?'

This is a completely different example, but what if the bride and groom at a wedding were asked, 'Do you vow to be happy?' and they said, 'Yeah... maybe, it'll be fine'?
It seems like something is already going wrong.

That is how important it is to 'be decisive' when expressing your will.
In the first place, it is decided that we will start moving after the meeting.
In that case, it is better to be decisive and charge ahead.

Distinguishing between when to be decisive and when to be non-committal

I am not used to being decisive at all.
However, there have been many times when a meeting that should have reached a conclusion was overturned because I couldn't be decisive.

So, lately, I have been forcing myself to be decisive.
What is important for that is to think about your 'role' in advance.

Are you the chair of the meeting, the proposer, or are you on the side providing comments?
Are you the decision-maker, or are you the one seeking approval from the decision-maker?

Think about your role based on the meeting participants and the purpose of the meeting.
And when you think you are in a position to decide, change your language.

The point is not to assert everything.
When it really counts, such as with a conclusion, say things clearly, like 'Let's go with Plan A.'

And another point is to 'speak clearly until the end of the sentence.'
The impression of your tone of voice cannot be underestimated.
Just by having your voice trail off at the end, like 'I think this is... good,' you look like you lack confidence.

That is precisely why I speak until the end.
It may be a technique, but in the end, what matters is the impression the listener gets, so I use every possible method.

Honestly, I envy people who are naturally confident and speak clearly.
But lamenting what I lack won't make my work any easier.
That is why, summoning all the strength I have, I will make a firm statement again today.