Why “Just Handle It” Is Not a Strategy

The hidden cost of informal decision-making under pressure

In many SMEs, there is an unspoken expectation that when something goes wrong, someone will “just handle it.”

The phrase sounds reassuring. It signals confidence, experience, and decisiveness. It suggests the business is agile, not bureaucratic. In smaller teams especially, it feels efficient to rely on judgment rather than process.

Until the moment it isn’t.

“Just handle it” is not a strategy.

It is a placeholder for unexamined assumptions—about authority, competence, and risk tolerance—that only reveal themselves when pressure is applied.

Under calm conditions, informal decision-making works. People communicate easily. Context is shared. Minor mistakes are corrected quickly.

But when stress enters the system—through an incident, a complaint, an inspection, or public scrutiny—informality becomes fragile.

The culprits:

Invisible decision ownership

When no framework exists, decisions default to whoever happens to be present, loudest, or most senior in the room. This may or may not be the right person. Others hesitate, unsure whether stepping in would be helpful or insubordinate. Accountability becomes blurred, even as decisions are being made in real time.

Inconsistent responses

Without shared reference points, similar situations are handled differently depending on who is involved. One supervisor escalates immediately. Another tries to contain the issue. One documents everything. Another relies on memory. Over time, this inconsistency erodes internal confidence and external credibility.

Retrospective justification

When outcomes are questioned later, decisions made under pressure are explained after the fact. Rationales are reconstructed. Actions are defended rather than examined. This is rarely dishonest—it is human—but it makes learning difficult. The organisation cannot distinguish between what was intentional and what was improvised.

Staff anxiety

When expectations are implicit rather than explicit, people carry the risk personally. They worry about being blamed for overreacting or underreacting. They delay escalation to avoid appearing incompetent. Or they escalate prematurely to protect themselves. Either way, decisions become defensive rather than deliberate.

Over time, this creates a quiet culture of caution.

Not calm—but avoidance.

Businesses often respond by trying to add more rules or more detail. But the issue is not a lack of instructions. It is the absence of decision architecture.

Effective operational readiness does not eliminate judgment. It supports it.

It clarifies:

• who has authority to decide, and when;

• what must be escalated without debate;

• what discretion is allowed, and what is not;

• what needs to be captured immediately, even if incomplete.

This kind of structure does not slow organisations down. It speeds them up by removing hesitation.

Importantly, it also protects relationships. When roles and thresholds are clear, decisions are less likely to feel personal. Staff can act without fear that hindsight will be weaponised against them.

The strongest organisations are not the ones where everything is tightly controlled. They are the ones where people know when they are expected to exercise judgement—and when they are expected to stop and escalate.

“Just handle it” feels empowering in the moment .But without shared clarity, it pushes risk downward and learning backward.

Strategy is not about doing more--it is about deciding in advance how decisions will be made when there is no time to think.

---

A Quiet Note

If this reflects situations you’ve encountered, it may be worth stepping back and examining how decisions are actually made under pressure — not just how they are meant to be made.

First Forge works with SMEs to clarify roles, escalation thresholds, and decision frameworks before issues arise.

If a short, no-obligation conversation would be helpful, feel free to reach out at ops@thefirstforge.com

Back to Home