LEADERSHIP · IDEAS

The meeting ends with agreement. Everyone understands the problem. Everyone has contributed. Then the work stops because nobody knows who can make the final decision.

An organization chart may explain who reports to whom. It often leaves a different question unanswered: who has the authority to decide when a choice crosses departments?

For Latino executives, founders, and professionals moving into leadership, that gap can turn a promising initiative into weeks of negotiation. Clear decision rights help people act with confidence—and know when a decision belongs elsewhere.

In Brief

• Reporting relationships do not automatically establish decision authority.
• Separate routine operating choices from strategic workforce decisions and major enterprise risks.
• Name the final decision-maker, required input, evidence, limits, and review cadence.

Locate the decision

Imagine a company redesigning a role after introducing automation. Operations understands the work. Finance understands the cost. HR understands the implications for employees. Technology understands the tool.

Each perspective is necessary. But consultation does not answer who approves the redesign, who decides whether employees need new training, or who can stop the project if its assumptions prove wrong.

When authority remains informal, employees may learn to find the person with the strongest influence rather than follow a dependable process. A decision can change depending on who attends the meeting. That is difficult to scale and difficult to explain.

Clarity about who decides gives collaboration somewhere to lead.

Use three levels of authority

I organize workforce decisions into three broad categories. The exact boundaries should reflect the size, risk, and governance of the business.

Operational decisions keep work moving: approving a hire within an agreed plan, handling a performance cycle, or administering an established compensation process. Put authority close enough to the work to avoid unnecessary escalation, with clear limits.

Strategic workforce decisions change what the organization needs or how it operates. These include capability investments, organizational redesign, and alternative staffing scenarios. They require a shared view of business priorities, costs, and people implications.

Enterprise risk decisions carry broader consequences, such as a major contraction or an automation program that changes roles at scale. These need appropriate executive oversight and, where the organization's governance calls for it, board visibility.

The purpose is to distinguish consequences. A routine approval should not need the same forum as a decision that changes the future of the workforce.

Write down the rules people need

For each recurring decision, name one final authority. Identify who must contribute expertise, who implements the choice, and who needs to be informed. Where formal governance requires a collective decision, specify the body and its process.

Also define the evidence needed, the financial or risk limits, and the escalation route. Give participants appropriate access to the information they need; shared visibility should still respect employee confidentiality.

Decide when the choice will be reviewed. A workforce investment can have a different cadence from a daily operating exception. Without a review point, temporary arrangements can quietly become permanent.

A development opportunity

Clear authority also helps emerging leaders. People can practice judgment within an explicit boundary, receive feedback, and earn wider responsibility. They do not have to guess whether taking initiative will be welcomed or treated as overstepping.

That matters in organizations where access to influential colleagues shapes who gets heard. Written rules create a more visible route to participation. Leaders still have to invite useful input and take it seriously.

The Takeaway

Choose one decision that repeatedly stalls. Write down its final authority, required input, evidence, limits, and escalation route. Test the arrangement on the next real case and ask the people involved what remained unclear.

Your organization chart can remain useful. Give it a companion that explains how judgment becomes action.

About the Author

Jon Orozco, MBA, SHRM-SCP works at the intersection of strategy, people systems, operations, and Ai. He is the creator of the People Systems framework.

Adapted by the author for Latino Professionals Magazine from his article on LinkedIn. Examples in this essay are illustrative.