BUT!
Something has been left out of most of the paradigms. That something is related to the fact that the process of decision-making is a "making" process, not an "avoiding" process. There is a responsibility to accomplish, to move forward, to "lead". Administrators are supposed to "make" decisions. When they do not, or when they actually avoid making decisions, bad things always happen. Either their organizations become mired in mediocrity, or the activists among organizational stakeholders snipe at them until they make decisions (some of these snipe-pressured decisions can really get administrators into trouble).
When administrators share decision-making, they share a "making" process -- a process of leadership, not an "avoiding" process.
What all-too-frequently happens however, is that an empowered group decides "not to decide". The decision-avoiding adminstrator is comfortable here. The decision-making adminstrator is not. He or she knows that the snipes will soon commence sniping, the complainers will complain that yet another fad (shared decision-making) is a waste of time, and the kids will continue to muddle along - oblivious. What is needed is the expectation (or demand) that the empowered group produce a decision, even if tentative or temporary. A "strategy" in place of a "solution" is infinitely preferable to a continuance of "muddle". To be continued.
(under const.)
