This looks like a committed initiative with real momentum.

You may already be approaching — or in the middle of — a vendor, partner, or solution selection decision. Timeframes are clearer, options are narrowing, and the consequences of getting this wrong are tangible.

At this point, the challenge is rarely a lack of choice. It’s ensuring that the decision is robust, defensible, and clearly justified to those who need to approve and support it.

Teams at this stage often underestimate how exposed the decision has become.

Common patterns include:

• comparing options without a shared or explicit decision framework,
• focusing on solution features rather than decision rationale,
• or struggling to articulate why one option is right — beyond “it seems best”.

Under scrutiny from finance, leadership, procurement, or the board, these gaps become visible quickly. When that happens, decisions stall, credibility erodes, or momentum is lost at the point it matters most.

What’s most useful here is decision structure, not more information.

Leaders in similar situations often benefit from:

• making decision criteria, trade-offs, and assumptions explicit,
• stress-testing how the decision would be challenged by finance or leadership,
• ensuring options are comparable on the dimensions that actually matter,
• and building a clear narrative that explains not just what was chosen, but why.

This isn’t about slowing things down — it’s about reducing the risk of reversal, rework, or loss of confidence after the decision is made.

If you already have a specific programme, session, or conversation in mind, you can jump straight there.

• Join the waiting list for our co-mentoring decision-support programme
• Speak with us about a specific decision you’re working through and we'll do our best to suggest good people in the Club to connect with

Use BestPractice.Club in the way that best supports formal approval and long-term confidence in the decision.