reversible-decisions

What this skill does

# Reversible Decisions (Type 1 vs. Type 2)

> Know when to move fast and when to move carefully. Master Jeff Bezos' framework for distinguishing high-stakes irreversible decisions from low-stakes reversible ones.

## When to Use This Skill

- **Prioritizing decisions** to know where to invest time
- **Team empowerment** to understand what to delegate vs. escalate
- **Avoiding analysis paralysis** on decisions that don't matter
- **Risk management** to identify where caution is truly warranted
- **Speed vs. thoroughness** trade-offs in any context
- **Building decision-making culture** in organizations

## Methodology Foundation

| Aspect | Details |
|--------|---------|
| **Source** | Jeff Bezos - Amazon shareholder letters (2015-2016) |
| **Core Principle** | "Some decisions are irreversible and consequential (Type 1). Most are reversible and low-consequence (Type 2). Use the right process for each." |
| **Why This Matters** | Most people treat all decisions like Type 1—slow, deliberate, requiring full information. This leads to paralysis and missed opportunities. The best decision-makers move fast on Type 2 and slow on Type 1. |


## What Claude Does vs What You Decide

| Claude Does | You Decide |
|-------------|------------|
| Structures content frameworks | Final messaging |
| Suggests persuasion techniques | Brand voice |
| Creates draft variations | Version selection |
| Identifies optimization opportunities | Publication timing |
| Analyzes competitor approaches | Strategic direction |

## What This Skill Does

1. **Classifies decisions** - Is this Type 1 or Type 2?
2. **Calibrates process to stakes** - Right speed for right decision
3. **Enables delegation** - Type 2 can be pushed down
4. **Prevents over-analysis** - Stop treating reversible decisions as irreversible
5. **Improves organizational speed** - Teams move faster on the right things
6. **Reduces decision fatigue** - Don't waste energy on low-stakes choices

## How to Use

### Classify a Decision
```
Help me classify this decision:
[Describe the decision]
Is this Type 1 (irreversible) or Type 2 (reversible)?
What process should I use?
```

### Speed Up Decision-Making
```
I'm spending too much time on [decision].
Apply the Type 1/Type 2 framework to help me move faster.
```

### Build Decision-Making Process
```
Help me design a decision-making framework for my team.
Which decisions should require consensus vs. individual judgment?
```

## Instructions

### Step 1: Understand the Framework

```
## Type 1 vs. Type 2 Decisions

### Bezos' Definition

**Type 1: One-Way Doors**
"Some decisions are consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible—
one-way doors—and these decisions must be made methodically, carefully,
slowly, with great deliberation and consultation."

**Type 2: Two-Way Doors**
"But most decisions aren't like that—they are changeable, reversible—
they're two-way doors. If you've made a suboptimal Type 2 decision,
you don't have to live with the consequences for that long.
You can reopen the door and go back through."

### The Problem

"As organizations get larger, there seems to be a tendency to use
the heavy-weight Type 1 decision-making process on most decisions,
including many Type 2 decisions. The end result of this is slowness,
unthoughtful risk aversion, failure to experiment sufficiently,
and consequently diminished invention."

### The Solution

"We must resist this tendency."

Type 2 decisions should be made quickly by high-judgment individuals
or small groups. Type 1 decisions require the full deliberative process.
```

---

### Step 2: Classification Framework

```
## How to Classify Decisions

### The Two Questions

**Question 1: Is it reversible?**
Can you undo this decision with reasonable effort and cost?

| Reversibility | Examples |
|---------------|----------|
| **Easily reversible** | Pricing change, A/B test, new feature flag, hire (with trial), campaign |
| **Hard to reverse** | Architecture choice, brand name, key hire (C-level), market exit |
| **Irreversible** | Selling company, shutting down product, firing someone, legal action |

**Question 2: What are the consequences?**
If this decision is wrong, what happens?

| Consequence Level | Examples |
|-------------------|----------|
| **Low** | Internal process change, small experiment, minor feature |
| **Medium** | New product launch, pricing tier, team restructure |
| **High** | Major strategic pivot, large investment, partnership |
| **Existential** | Acquisition, shutdown, bet-the-company move |

### The Matrix

```
                    CONSEQUENCES
                    Low         High
REVERSIBILITY  ┌────────────┬────────────┐
    High       │   TYPE 2   │   TYPE 2   │
    (Easy)     │   (Fast)   │  (Fast w/  │
               │            │  monitoring)│
               ├────────────┼────────────┤
    Low        │   TYPE 2   │   TYPE 1   │
    (Hard)     │  (Careful) │   (Slow)   │
               └────────────┴────────────┘
```

### Quick Classification

**TYPE 2 (Move Fast):**
- Can be undone
- Low/medium consequences
- Learning opportunity
- Failure is recoverable
- Most business decisions

**TYPE 1 (Move Carefully):**
- Can't be undone
- High/existential consequences
- Mistakes are permanent
- One-way door
- ~5-10% of decisions
```

---

### Step 3: Match Process to Type

```
## Decision Process by Type

### Type 2 Process (70% of Decisions)

**Time:** Hours to days (not weeks)
**Who:** Individual or small group with context
**Information:** Good enough, not perfect
**Approval:** None or single level
**Documentation:** Minimal (decision log)

**The Mantra:**
"Disagree and commit" - If you have 70% of the information you wish you had,
make the decision. Waiting for 90% is usually too slow.

**Process:**
1. Identify it's Type 2 (reversible, recoverable)
2. Gather available information quickly
3. Make the call
4. Communicate the decision
5. Monitor and adjust

**Examples:**
- Feature prioritization
- Hiring most roles
- Process changes
- Pricing experiments
- Marketing campaigns
- Internal tools
- Meeting schedules

---

### Type 1 Process (5-10% of Decisions)

**Time:** Weeks to months
**Who:** Senior leadership, broad input
**Information:** As complete as reasonably possible
**Approval:** Multiple stakeholders
**Documentation:** Thorough (rationale, alternatives, risks)

**The Mantra:**
"Measure twice, cut once" - This is permanent. Get it right.

**Process:**
1. Confirm it's Type 1 (irreversible, consequential)
2. Define decision criteria clearly
3. Gather comprehensive information
4. Consider alternatives thoroughly
5. Consult relevant stakeholders
6. Document the reasoning
7. Make the decision
8. Communicate extensively

**Examples:**
- M&A decisions
- Major strategic pivots
- Leadership hires (C-level)
- Market entry/exit
- Large capital allocation
- Shutting down products
- Legal/regulatory choices
```

---

### Step 4: Common Traps

```
## Decision-Making Traps

### Trap 1: Treating Type 2 as Type 1

**Symptom:** Analysis paralysis on small decisions
**Example:** 2-week committee review for a landing page change
**Problem:** Slows innovation, frustrates teams, misses opportunities
**Fix:** Ask "What's the worst case if we're wrong? Can we fix it?"

### Trap 2: Treating Type 1 as Type 2

**Symptom:** Moving too fast on irreversible choices
**Example:** Acquiring a company in 2 weeks
**Problem:** Permanent mistakes, existential risk
**Fix:** Ask "If this goes wrong, can we undo it?"

### Trap 3: Requiring Consensus on Type 2

**Symptom:** Everyone needs to agree before action
**Example:** 10-person meeting to decide email copy
**Problem:** Slowest person becomes bottleneck
**Fix:** Empower individuals to make Type 2 calls

### Trap 4: Not Recognizing Type 1 in Disguise

**Symptom:** Missing irreversibility hidden in details
**Example:** "Small" technical choice that creates years of debt
**Problem:** Accumulated Type 1 decisions dressed as Type 2
**Fix:** Consider second-order effe