Collective Leadership & Decision Making

Owner: Accountable = Director of Orgazational Strategy & Learning (DOSL). Responsible = Director of Finance & Operations (DFO), with support and input from all Directors Audience: All OWL staff, partners, and stakeholders

Purpose

Open Way Learning embraces a collective leadership model that intentionally departs from traditional hierarchy employed by other organizations. Inspired by The Open Organization (Whitehurst), Drive (Pink), and Open Up, Education! (Owens & Haigler), we treat leadership as a practice, not a position - one grounded in transparency, purpose, distributed authority, agile learning, and psychological safety. This procedure is the bedrock for how we routinely and consistently decide, deliver, and improve as a small, nimble nonprofit. It exists so anyone at OWL can confidently lead a decision without waiting for permission, while also staying aligned to shared guardrails, systems, and mission.

Why this matters

Collective leadership only works when decision protocols are clear, our work is open and transparent, and follow-through is predictable and reliable. What follows turns our values into day-to-day practice so we can move nimbly and quickly while always keeping our promises to each other and our partners.

How to use this document (at a glance)

• Use the following Quickstart every week as our “minimum viable operating system” for making nimble decisions aligned to OWL’s values and distributed leadership culture.

• Use the RACI-S table when a decision is more complex or crosses role boundaries, especially if it affects money, scope, risk, reputation, or cross-role capacity.

• Log decisions in Slack #decision_log whenever they are likely to change someone else’s plan, budget, timeline, promise, or risk posture.

• For deeper how-to details (meeting structures, facilitation norms, performance management, etc.), use the following appendices or the SOPs/Playbook sections referenced throughout this document:

  • Appendix 1 – Decision Types & Methods: More detail for when to use Delegated Authority, Consent, or Board approval; how to tag Decision Ladder levels and when to log.

  • Appendix 2 – Example Scenarios: Short, typical case studies that help the reader see patterns and notes for when and how to use our decision-making tools, including grants, MOUs, events, tools, renewals, etc.

Quickstart

Why does this document exist? We lead through distributed authority, transparent systems, and mission alignment. This procedure is the bedrock for how we decide, deliver, and improve and should be used as a routine tool for how you make decisions within your role and across the organization’s functions.

1) Decision Modes + Decision Ladder

Decision modes: We use Consent, Consensus, and Delegated Authority - selected intentionally, based on the applicable level in the following decision ladder.

OWL’s Decision Ladder (3 levels + examples):

1. Operational Level: (individual, well within one’s Roles & Responsibilities; fast & nimble):

   • Standard Procedure: Owner decides; logs outcome; informs stakeholders.

   • Example: Moving a delivery date inside scope; swapping a facilitation protocol, etc..

   • Mode: Delegated Authority → Log in #decision_log only if it has broader implications.

2. Tactical Level: (cross-role/lane implications):

   • Standard Procedure: Owner drafts; consults another role or small team; finalizes decision per collaboration; logs.

   • Example: Adjusting contract deliverables, rebalancing a PM’s capacity, etc.

   • Mode: Small team collaboration per RACI → Log in #decision_log.

3. Strategic / Mission-critical Level:

   • Standard Procedure: “Accountable” person proposes the decision at hand; Director Team reviews with a goal of consensus; elevate to Board when required; log.

   • Example: Changing pricing guardrails, multi-year budget shifts, public commitments, grant submissions, etc.

   • Mode: Director team consultation per RACI → Log in #decision_log.

After every decision (how we keep OWL’s work open, disciplined, and mission-aligned):

1. Document and communicate outcomes (esp. those marked “I”). This ensures quick learning so that our systems get a little better each time.

2. Implement & track decision follow-up steps. Update any applicable Productive cards and tie decision outcomes to any applicable role objectives and/or KPIs for the organization.

3. Reflect & improve. Use monthly strategy meetings to debrief and document key decision impacts (as appropriate).

2) Follow the RACI-S Standard

Consistently use the RACI-S table below for key decisions required in the organization, as well as other similar scenarios. Reference the appendices for additional detail on how and when to use this table.

RACI-S Format/criteria:

• Exactly one “A” (Accountable) per decision. Note that while we strive for consensus, the “A” has the final say per their role.

• R (Responsible) executes the decision (is often also the A);

• C (Consulted) gives input before decision;

• I (Informed) receives outcomes;

• S (Support) co-builds or provides critical resourcing (when applicable).

RACI-S Table Guardrail (prevents bloat)

This table is intentionally small. A decision type belongs here only if it meets BOTH tests:

1. Frequency: it comes up at least quarterly, AND

2. Stakes: it touches money, scope/commitments, partner risk, legal/compliance, or OWL-wide precedent.

Everything else should be handled with the Decision Ladder + the Roles & Responsibilities docs (and logged in #decision_log when it affects others).

We also prune this table quarterly: if a row hasn’t been used in the last 6 months, it gets removed or moved to an appendix/pattern library.

OWL’s RACI-S Table

Decision Area	Accountable (A)	Responsible (R)	Consulted (C)	Informed (I)	Support (S)
Budget Strategy & Financial Oversight	DFO	DFO	DPIV, D-OSL	Board	-
Contract Pricing & Terms (inside guardrails)	DFO	DFO	PM of record, D-OSL (precedent)	Board (if exception)	-
Go/No-Go on Scope/Precedent/Mission Fit	D-OSL	PM of record	DFO (pricing/terms), DPIV (delivery/ brand)	Board (if exception)	-
Grant Submissions (final)	D-OSL	PM/DPIV (narrative & submission)	DFO (budget/ compliance)	Team (Board if material)	DFO (attachments/ packaging)
PM Region / Portfolio Assignments	D-OSL	D-OSL	DPIV, DFO	Team	DFO (calendar/ admin)
Scope Changes (within contract)	PM of record	PM of record	DFO, DPIV	Team	DFO (contract/ admin)
Travel Above Budget / Risk-bearing Logistics	DFO	DFO (or designee)	PM, D-OSL	Team	-
Hiring / Contractor Adds (Fellows)	DFO	DFO (or designee)	DPIV, D-OSL	Team	-
Public Comms & Major Announce- ments	DPIV	DPIV	D-OSL, DFO	Team	DFO (channels/ admin)
Tool / Process Adoption (SOP updates)	D-OSL	DFO (roll-out/admin)	DFO, DPIV	Team	-
KPI Set & Quarterly Reviews	Each Director (domain)	Each Director	D-OSL, DFO	Team/Board (as req’d)	DFO (dashboards)
Risk Escalation / Crisis Response	D-OSL	D-OSL	DFO, DPIV	Board	DFO (coordination)
Data / Reporting Commitments	DPIV	DPIV	DFO, D-OSL	Team/ Funders	DFO (systems/ artifacts)

Role keys:

• D-OSL = Director of Organizational Strategy & Learning;

• DFO = Director of Finance & Operations;

• DPIV = Director of Program Impact & Visibility;

• PM = Program Manager of record.

3) Decision Log Protocol

Every decision above the Operational level is logged in the Slack #decision_log per this Rule of Thumb: If a decision is likely to change someone else’s plan, money, timeline, promise, or risk - log it. Use the “5-R” test below:

Log it when ≥1 of these is true:

1. Reach - affects another person/role, a partner, or a deadline.

2. Resources - touches budget, travel, staffing, or billables.

3. Risk - creates legal, safety, brand, or delivery risk.

4. Reversibility - hard to undo (a “one-way door”).

5. Reputation/Record - sets a precedent or external commitment.

Examples

• No log (Operational, reversible): swap an icebreaker, revise a slide deck, reorder an activity in the same session. If it only affects how you deliver (and is easily reversible), no log.

• Log (Tactical): move a workshop date, reassign PM capacity, change scope/deliverables, request travel above budget, shift invoicing timing, ask others for >30 minutes of work.

• Log (Strategic): price/contract exceptions, grant submissions, public announcements, KPIs/OKRs changes, risk escalations.

When you log something in Slack’s #decision_log channel, use the following format:

• Title: Clear and descriptive title

• Owner (A): Decision’s owner - Name/Role

• Who’s involved (as applicable): R / C / I / S (names)

• Decision Summary: Brief description of what was decided (what happens now), along with applicable details (due date, who’s on point, next steps, etc.). Link to Productive card or other doc, as applicable.

Example: DECISION (Tactical): Shift WNCRP workshop sequence by 2 weeks. A: DPIV. R: PM (Wes). C: DFO, D-OSL. I: Partners. Outcome: New dates confirmed; Productive updated; comms out by Fri.

If in doubt, log - short and clear beats invisible and assumed.

4) Operating Discipline Checklist

OWL operates with a small, nimble team in a collective (non-hierarchical) manner. As such, we must be agile at scale in order to consistently deliver high quality, mission-driven work. This requires a high degree of operating discipline that matches creativity with consistent habits:

• Use Slack for essential internal communication and #decision_log for key decisions. No side channels for the organization’s essential work.

• Keep Productive current. Cards are always updated before the weekly scrum; follow the “no shadow work” principle.

• Maintain file hygiene. Use shared folders, naming conventions, and keep current SOPs/Playbooks codified in GitBook so others can see and use the latest versions.

• Submit receipts & billables weekly in Quickbooks to keep invoicing clean and the organization’s cash flow healthy.

• Calendar accuracy + sub plan when you’ll be out of the office (owner, deputies, links, etc.).

• Clearly Communicate Status: Use this format: Here’s where we are → Here’s the gap → Here’s the next step.

• ROI Guardrail applied to all new/expanding work; pause if not met.

This is “how we do excellence,” not bureaucracy.

5) Team & Collaborative Norms

We typically adopt the role of “warm demanders” when working with clients: providing a high level of respect and care with a set of high standards and expectations. Likewise, our internal meetings and collaboration should have that same balance, always feeling open, efficient, and respectful of peoples’ roles and time..

Non-negotiable norms:

• We always use shared systems (no shadow work): Productive for work, Slack for internal communication and coordination, GitBook for core procedures, Drive for shared files, etc..

• We are always clear and kind: name risks early, assume good intent, give direct feedback without drama.

• We protect flow: default to async when possible and then use live time for decisions, unblocking, or co-design.

• We follow agendas and do what we say we’re going to do, including following this simple framework in every meeting or thread: “Here’s where we are → here’s the gap → here’s the next step.”

• When a decision changes someone else’s plan, money, timeline, promise, or risk posture: log it in the Slack #decision_log.

Cross-reference (kept lean on purpose):

For meeting structures, agendas, scrum flow, and collaboration rituals, use the SOP: “OWL Scrum Meeting Agenda & Expectations.”

6) Performance, Growth, & Accountability - Backstop

Like traditional management structures, distributed leadership environments also need a fair, consistent way to respond to sustained performance gaps, policy breaches, or behavior that erodes trust. For OWL, we have a default posture for such situations of coaching and clarity first and then escalate only when patterns persist or risk is acute.

Trigger to escalate (5-R test): Escalate as a formal personnel performance issue when there is a sustained pattern that affects our Reach, Resources, Risk, Reversibility, or Reputation/Record.

Minimum viable escalation path:

• Stage 0 (Coaching): peer-to-peer clarity with concrete next steps and a specific and reasonable follow-up date.

• Stage 1 (Documented expectations): written expectations with targeted supports and a time-boxed check-in cadence with the rest of the team.

• Stage 2+ (Formal HR process): handled per OWL’s performance management procedure, with appropriate confidentiality and Board involvement when required.

Confidentiality standard: Operational impacts may be logged in #decision_log (sanitized, no personnel details). Personnel documentation lives only in restricted HR records managed by the DFO (or Board designee when required).

Cross-reference (system of record): See the Employee Handbook / Performance Management SOP for the full process, templates, and legal/HR safeguards.

Appendix 1: OWL’s Decision Types & Methods (Aligned to the Decision Ladder)

How to use: Pick the type/level, apply the primary method, ensure exactly one “A” in RACI-S, and post to #decision_log when the decision affects others’ plans, money, timelines, promises, or risk.

Decision Type (Ladder Level)	Characteristics	Typical Examples	Primary Method	RACI-S Notes	Log?
Operational (Team-Level)	Low risk, time-sensitive, localized impact; easily reversible	Agenda tweaks, room setup, minor invoice timing, swapping a facilitation activity	Delegated Authority	Owner is A; consult only if another person’s plan is affected	Log only if it changes someone else’s plan/money/timeline/risk
Tactical (Cross-Lane Impact)	Medium impact within or across portfolios; touches budget, capacity, scope, or partner expectations	Shift workshop dates, reassign PM capacity, within-guardrail scope change, modest travel above plan	Consent after targeted consults	One A; identify C roles early; add S if co-build needed	Yes - post concise entry with Decision Ladder tag
Strategic (Org-Level / Multi-Year / Brand)	High impact; affects systems, pricing/ROI, partnerships, multi-year grants, public commitments	New partnership/MOU, pricing exceptions, major public campaign, large grant submission	Consent with director team; escalate per governance	One A; Board I (or C) when material; link to artifacts	Yes - always
Mission-Critical (Future, Brand, or Structure)	Organization- defining; affects solvency, mission/vision, leadership, or legal posture	Annual budget adoption, leadership restructuring, mission/ vision revision	Board Review/ Approval (per bylaws)	One A internally; Board role specified; legal/ compliance C	Yes - include approvals and effective dates
Ambiguous / Shared (Sensemaking Needed)	Doesn’t fall cleanly in one lane; requires co-design to clarify ownership and risk	New cross-functional tool, equity-focused expansion, novel edge cases	Co-design + Consent using RACI-S	Clarify one A before finalizing; use S for shared build	Yes - link to the chosen pattern in “Appendix 2 Scenarios”

Best-practice notes to the above (applies to all types of decisions):

• One A, always. Collaboration ≠ multiple “owners.” Use RACI-S (along with respective Roles & Responsibility documents) to keep roles crisp.

• Make nimble decisions at the lowest responsible level. Escalate only when the 5-R test hits: Reach, Resources, Risk, Reversibility (one-way door), Reputation/Record.

• Keep it lightweight. A good #decision_log entry is 3–5 lines (summary, RACI-S, why it matters, next step, link).

• If in doubt, log. Short + clear beats invisible + assumed.

• For complex/cross-team items, reference a matching pattern in Appendix 2: Example Scenarios Using RACI-S and link them together.

Appendix 2: Example Scenarios Using RACI-S

The following examples illustrate how OWL’s collective leadership model uses the RACI-S framework in real-world decisions. These examples are far from an exhaustive list of the kinds of decisions OWL will face, but they do provide an internal reference point to support the kind of shared understanding and reinforcement of the importance of clarity, transparency, and collaboration in our work so that we successfully leverage OWL’s distributed leadership model in order to better meet the needs of our stakeholders.

When to use this. If a decision crosses lanes and you’re unsure how to assign roles, use the scenarios below as patterns. Always ensure there is exactly one “A” (Accountable); tag the Decision Ladder level (Operational / Tactical / Strategic) and post to the Slack #decision_log.

Scenario 1 - New Grant Proposal (programmatic; due in 4 weeks)

• Level: Strategic (funding + public commitment)

• A: D-OSL

• R: PM (narrative + submission)

• C: DFO (budget/compliance), DPIV (impact story/data), D-OSL (strategic fit)

• I: Team (Board if material)

• S: DFO (attachments/packaging)

Notes: If staffing, scope, or match assumptions change, log linked Scope/Capacity and Budget decisions; coordinate funder stewardship with D-OSL; after submission, post the grant link, budget version, and a RACI-S snapshot in #decision_log and pin in the project thread.

Scenario 2 - Strategic Partnership with Another Nonprofit (MOU, roles, boundaries)

• Level: Strategic (brand, revenue, scope, long-term commitments)

• A: D-OSL

• R: PM (partner vetting, term sheet/MOU drafting, internal alignment)

• C: D-OSL (mission/strategy fit, governance), DFO (budget, risk, compliance, data/privacy), DPIV (program alignment, visibility/branding), PM(s) (delivery feasibility)

• I: Team; Board informed if material (e.g., multi-year, co-branding, funding flows)

• S: DFO (MOU language, insurance/indemnity, data-sharing terms), DPIV (storytelling/brand assets), PM(s) (pilot scoping)

Notes: If the partnership changes delivery promises, budget exposure, or staffing, log linked Scope/Capacity and Budget decisions; if co-fundraising is involved, log a Grant/Donor Coordination decision (lead, calendar, stewardship); after execution, post the final MOU link and a RACI-S snapshot in #decision_log and pin in the shared channel.

Scenario 3 - Onboarding a New Fellow/Contractor

• Level: Tactical

• A: DFO (contracting/compliance)

• R: PM (SOW/goals), DFO (agreement, W-9/COI, pay terms, access)

• C: DPIV (delivery expectations), D-OSL (fit with strategy)

• I: Team

• S: DPIV (mentoring/shadowing plan)

Notes: If role affects partner delivery or replaces staff capacity, log a Scope/Capacity decision; schedule and log the 60-day check-in (PM owner) with a short performance note; post the executed agreement link and access checklist in #decision_log.

Scenario 4 - Public Campaign / Major Announcement (brand/reputation)

• Level: Strategic (brand/reputation)

• A: DPIV

• R: DPIV (message & channels)

• C: D-OSL (strategic frame), DFO (funder/partner angles, compliance/brand)

• I: Team; Board informed via liaison when material

• S: DFO (channel scheduling, web updates, asset management)

Notes: If announcing dates/deliverables, log a linked Scope/Timeline decision; attach the message map and calendar to the decision post; after launch, post a brief impact readout (reach, engagement, next step).