There are quite a few initiatives deeply in debt from borrowing against their future intelligence when the interest was high and the prospects were low.
These teams rightly believe that during the course of an initiative more data will lead to a progression of understanding. The later an analysis comes the more data it has to analyze. While waiting on this richer analysis they push off decisions to later and act as if a given path is the right way to proceed, expecting to adapt when needed. This is an exercise in borrowing from their future capacity to adapt and solve for the new path informed by the richer data.
However, there is another effect in waiting, that is that the later an analysis come, the more it tends to arise from urgency. Urgency brings clarity, but can lead to nearsighted and inconsistent resolution. If no framework exists to govern urgency, then many of these decisions end up having a higher cost than needed in terms of both activity churn and lower decision quality.
It is as easy to overestimate our capacity to create effective frameworks in urgency as it is to critique the mistakes of our rivals.
When decision points with incomplete information are identified, ask yourself whether this challenges your framework or fits within it. If your framework doesn’t handle this item, don’t wait to make the first investment in upgrading that framework.
Giving yourself a framework for understanding of the kinds of impacts arising from different paths can reduce the debt you carry forward and highlight where paths may never yield a return.
You should always borrow against your ability to adapt on the fly. Your concern should be when you’ve over leveraged yourself with a poorly develop framework and the payments are starting to come due.
Return on Intelligence 