Act Now. Moonshots and Decision Making. 1:3:1.

Four minutes into the landing sequence of the first manned moon landing Neil Armstrong sent an alarm message to mission control.

Most people know that going to the moon was a risky endeavor, but few know how risky the real time landing proved to be.

In the lunar module Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin faced a dire situation.

With their fuel supplies rapidly diminishing, Armstrong looked out the window and viewed a daunting scene. Below, in the space where he was directed to land, the surface was filled with truck-sized boulders and dark craters. Due to the moon’s lumpy gravity, they had picked up unexpected speed and overshot the planned landing area.

Armstrong was faced with the problem of running low on fuel while approaching a treacherous landing site.

As fuel levels fell, Armstrong had 60 seconds to make a decision.

I've been with my company Axon for the last 10+ years. In that time we've scaled up from a few hundred people to now well over 1000. As the company has scaled we've struggled with adding just the right amount of process and structure but also ensuring we keep an environment where we can empower decision makers. In full candor it feels like the structure and process organically globs onto things and not always in ways that adds or creates value. See: Parkinson's Law.

In an effort to keep our entrepreneurial spirit we’ve been talking a lot recently about how we can make faster decisions at Axon. As I stated above as the company has scaled to over 1000 people, it’s become harder to execute rapidly and establish clear decision-making authority.

Getting more people involved often sounds like a good idea, but it slows the pace of decision-making and stifles execution. It may feel safer to gather consensus before making a decision, but in reality we may be headed straight for the boulders if we don't act quickly enough to steer the ship. People-managers in particular often feel like they should be involved in decisions, but I encourage managers and leaders to see value in cultivating excellent decision-makers and executers within their teams over being the actual decision maker in every decision.

***Ultimately, a company’s value is just the sum of the decisions it makes and executes.***

In order to empower decision-making throughout Axon, we encourage everyone to embrace a 1:3:1 framework to problem-solving. The 1:3:1 framework is intended to empower everyone to make decisions, promote ownership thinking, and enable us everyone to "Act Now."

The 1:3:1 framework is:

• 1: Identify a problem
• 3: Come up with three proposed solutions
• 1: Made a recommendation on the best proposed solution- if possible, act on the best recommendation

90% of decisions in a company should be made by individuals and small teams, without the need to consult a long line of people.

Exceptions to this would be large-impact decisions and extensive capital allocations, which are best made in a centralized fashion at the executive level. Most decisions, though, are smaller and can be made without a lot oversight-- if any at all.

An organization's first priority should be not to create and follow procedures; but to create value. My intent at Axon is to create an environment where every individual feels responsible for the company's success and is empowered to act. It may not seem like a single, smaller decision will move the needle on any top-line goals, but the sum of these small decisions actually in aggregate create massive value.

A company's decision-making cycle should be a competitive advantage. As Jeff Bezos of Amazon says, “Speed matters in business.” At Axon we want to create an environment where it's acceptable to make some mistakes in order to reach quick decisions. We strongly believe agility in the face of challenges is better than creating a big, monolithic hierarchy where everything has to be approved. The tradeoff is that we will definitely make mistakes and fail. Not only is that okay it's absolutely necessary to grow and evolve.

Let’s go back to the first Moon Landing. It’s a stellar example of 1:3:1 where the stakes were incredibly high. Armstrong carried the weight of the world on his shoulders. The United States' reputation was at stake, along with his and Aldrin’s life. You can imagine in Armstrong's mind he went through a process of framing the problem and considering his options.

What was the problem? He faced a bad landing spot with diminishing fuel-levels. He weighed 3 potential options:

• Land in the rough area in front of him
• Abort the Mission
• Try and make it to a clear spot ahead

Armstrong then took action and navigated by his own sight to a safe landing area. He took responsibility to make the call that he thought would result in the best outcome. Taking on the personal responsibility of making a decision can be heavy and uncomfortable. But in a critical time Neil Armstrong took action, and a few moments later he uttered:

“…the Eagle has landed.”

***

Shoutout to Riad Nizam for introducing me to 1:3:1 and Danielle Sosa an Axon, LDP who found the great Apollo 11 example.