Agreed, the people building should ideally have the decision (which every now and then I think they are also liable to be overruled on). But this seems to say

Agreed, the people building should ideally have the decision (which every now and then I think they are also liable to be overruled on). But this seems to say they should be the only voice in the room too, which seems not right. It's not easy creating an environment where it's clear whose decision it is, and where teams feel ok brushing off other people's opinion. But I do think dialog & discourse are an important thing to maintain, and I am having a hard time seeing how that factors into this assertion. It's not perfect but I like having the org use the RAPID framework at my last job, as it established some framing/roles for secision making & was clear who had what roles: R, recommender, gathers input - makes a formal recommemdation. A, agree, optional, people signing off on recommendation. P, perform, the team doing the work. I, input, provide info/advice t o recommemder. D, decide, the decider who commits org to task, based on recommendation & it's gathered inputs. Often teams would be recommender, decider, & performer, but being clear on that was a nice positive.