Bureaucractic decisions VERSUS Operational decisions

Not many of us realize, but decisions made in meeting rooms often tend to be prolonged, stretched, and delayed. This is why decisions made in meetings are frequently considered bureaucratic in nature—they can be withheld, withdrawn, altered, or modified. When a decision goes wrong, the blame for the resulting consequences is often passed down to someone lower in the chain, most commonly someone within operations.

 However, decision-making on the operations side doesn't have such flexibility. Operational decisions must be made quickly, with limited resources, and often arise at the eleventh hour, leaving little or no time for reflection, data gathering, or securing the necessary resources that might ease the consequences if the decision doesn't work out. 

 For instance, if a dock master believes the power of the tugs available to him may be insufficient to handle a large ship, the issue will likely arise at the proverbial "eleventh hour." He will have to decide whether to accept the ship for docking under immense time pressure, while his superior is likely on leave or asleep at home. Moreover, the consequences of the dock master's decision will be immediate and unforgiving. If he accepts the ship for docking and an accident occurs, the blame will rarely fall on the Deputy Conservator or Harbour Master. On the other hand, if he rejects the ship for docking, the resulting delays will likely be blamed on him. In either case, the dock master's APAR score and career reputation will suffer. 

 What's worse is that this issue in operational decision-making is often unknown to their own senior, let alone the secretary department, the chairman, or other civil servants, who may not even consider it when making their assessments.