Communication and Decision-Making

This pre-work module introduces the Eisenhower Matrix, a tool for sorting tasks by importance and urgency to help you focus on what matters and avoid busy work. Participants log five recent time commitments and five anticipated performance-review or vision-related items, then plot all ten into the matrix and reflect on patterns, delegation opportunities, and past focus techniques. The module also has participants prepare real examples ahead of time???technical decisions explained to non-engineering audiences, and past or upcoming situations requiring influence with a stakeholder or colleague???to be used as material in a related communication and decision-making workshop.

This opening module frames the workshop's focus on team communication and decision-making, particularly for managers who juggle multiple roles and must navigate decisions flowing up, down, and across their organization. Participants check in with peers using a personal/professional/work-habits reflection tied to the Eisenhower Matrix (urgent vs. important) pre-work, then surface common stakeholder communication challenges through a group poll to set the stage for later skill-building.

This module examines how people gather and process information when making difficult decisions. Participants learn a three-part framework of decision-making behaviors???advocacy, inquiry, and summary???and use it to analyze their own habits and their team's tendencies, including where they typically fall on the "seesaw" between arguing a position and exploring others' views. The module also introduces the RACI framework for clarifying decision-making roles, and covers five common unconscious biases (confirmation bias, availability bias, anchoring effect, loss aversion, and in-group bias) that distort decision quality. Participants practice through small-group discussions of past difficult decisions, a self-reflection exercise, and a partner share-out where they identify which behaviors (advocacy, inquiry, summary) they and their partner used when defending a decision.

This module teaches RACI, a framework for clarifying decision-making roles on any project or process involving multiple people or teams. Participants learn the four roles???Responsible (does the work), Accountable (owns the final decision), Consulted (gives input beforehand), and Informed (told afterward)???then build a RACI chart for a real project of their own. Working in a breakout with a partner, they compare charts and discuss how clear (or unclear) roles have shaped the success or frustration of decision-making on that project, and what they could do differently.

This module teaches managers how to filter sensitive or complex information before sharing it with their teams. Using a case study built around a confidential litigation email ("Email from Rick") about a fictional product knockoff dispute, participants examine the risks of oversharing and undersharing information, then practice using the Think/Feel/Do tool to distill a message down to what a team needs to know, feel, and act on. The scenario is specific, but the filtering skill and the Think/Feel/Do tool generalize to any situation where a manager must decide what to pass along to their team.

This module teaches participants how to frame their point of view so it lands with a specific audience and drives action. Using the four Point of View questions (Why you? Why them? Why do you care? What action do you want to inspire?), participants apply techniques for simplifying complex information???framing for the listener's lens, starting with the "why," cutting acronyms, using metaphors, and chunking information. Participants practice by bringing a real, difficult decision or message they need to communicate to a stakeholder, drafting it with the four POV questions, and sharing it with a partner for feedback on clarity and impact.

This module teaches two tools for turning conflict and pushback into constructive dialogue: Reframing, and Acknowledge > Reframe > Offer. Participants first practice rewriting blame-focused statements (like "your team is impossible to work with") into neutral, forward-looking language that captures underlying needs and interests. They then apply Acknowledge > Reframe > Offer???a three-step structure for delivering a difficult "no"???to tech-team scenarios such as declining a last-minute feature request, pushing back on a mid-development redesign, or phasing out a legacy integration. In a partner exercise, participants draft and deliver their own pushback message for a real stakeholder situation, then give each other feedback and swap roles.

No exercises in this module.

This module teaches Think / Feel / Do, a meeting-prep tool that shifts preparation from "what will I say" to "what do I want my audience to think, feel, and do." Participants learn the framework, then apply it together as a group to a shared scenario, practice it in small groups on two additional scenarios, share back what they found (with particular attention to the FEEL step, which most people struggle with), and commit to running the tool on a real upcoming meeting before they prepare any talking points. Exercises are built around construction-industry client scenarios ??? a project behind schedule, a low-energy first impression with a high-profile client, and a disengaged client ??? and the tool generalizes to any high-stakes meeting or conversation.

This module teaches eight practical techniques for explaining technical topics to non-expert audiences: framing information from the listener's perspective, leading with why it matters, using plain language instead of jargon, using analogies and metaphors, breaking ideas into small chunks, checking for understanding, showing rather than just telling, and watching for confusion cues. Participants practice these techniques in a triad exercise called "The 2000-Year-Old Person," where one person explains a real technical decision or challenge to a partner role-playing someone unfamiliar with modern technology, while a third person observes which techniques land and which don't. A structured debrief follows to identify which techniques participants used intentionally, where explanations started to click, and what habits (like jargon or assumed knowledge) got in the way.

This closing module wraps up the Communication and Decision-Making program with a structured reflection discussion. Participants review the tools and concepts covered across the program and identify which ones they will apply, what they learned, and what their next steps are.