A startup CEO sits in a particularly passionate leadership team meeting. The debate is heated but respectful. Two camps emerge — one pulling right, the other left.
Right argues for focus. Stick with the current products. No shiny objects. Squash known bugs. Kill inefficiencies. Act on the user research already in hand. Double down on customer success so users feel heard.
This is the “steady hand” path, and the benefits are clear: Internal teams would finally see their long-ignored issues get attention, and customers would notice. Not a seismic shift but a solid forward step.
Left wants to swing bigger. Inaction would leave them behind in a fast-moving market. There is a gap no one has filled — not them nor their competitors. The idea is ambitious. Unproven. Do we have the right product? Is our tech up to the challenge? Can we ship fast enough to matter?
To go this way means throwing almost all technical resources at it. Tech debt would spike. Existing customers might feel neglected. Revenue might wobble. But if it works, they’d be playing a far bigger game.
There is no clear answer. As with most startup decisions, the data is incomplete, the runway short, and the resources finite. But the debate is done. The room is ready. Whatever the decision, the team will rally.
The CEO scans the room, clears his throat, and utters one of the most dangerous phrases in management:
“Let me think about it.”
The Cost of Waiting
Thinking, in itself, is good. Intentionality is a virtue. Slowing down to go fast is often a wise approach. But that’s not what’s happening here.
He’s hiding.
Behind the facade of reflection lies the truth: He doesn’t want to make the call. Not because he lacks data. Not because more thinking would yield a better answer. But because one side would be upset , and he hates that. The harmony addict clings to the fiction that leadership means pleasing everyone.
Raise your hand if you’ve worked for this person.
You know the signs. When a decision carries weight, when someone will be disappointed, this CEO ducks.
The phrases are predictable:
- “We should talk about it.”
- “We should think about it.”
- “Let’s take some time to review.”
Now, those sound harmless. But here’s what a CEO who understands their job might say:
- “Let’s discuss it in Thursday’s exec meeting. Expect a final call then.”
- “We should think it through and reconvene on Wednesday to decide.”
- “I need to mull it over. What’s our deadline for making the call? If I need more information from anyone in this room, I’ll be in touch by tomorrow.”
That’s leadership: creating space for nuance without dodging responsibility.
The other version? The one who waits? That leader isn’t protecting culture; they’re corroding it.
Indecision Is A Decision
Delaying decisions doesn’t create harmony; it breeds frustration. Disagreement isn’t a bug. It’s a feature of any high-functioning team. A startup that avoids it is a startup in trouble.
Ironically, the harmony-seeking CEO ends up frustrating everyone. Because not making a decision is a decision—just a passive, weak one. They may be aiming for peace through appeasement, but strong employees don’t want pacification. They want direction, the safety to question, and the tools to win.
The CEO’s job isn’t to eliminate conflict or blend every opinion into a bland compromise. It’s to navigate startup chaos with clarity and speed. Because the moment you say “Let me think about it,” the room stops moving…and so does the company.