I remember the exact moment a leader changed the way I thought about my own role.

Her name was Sarah. I was a team contributor at the time, capable, motivated, and quietly frustrated. Not because the work was hard, but because I couldn’t tell where my authority ended. Every time I wanted to make a call, even a small one, I’d hesitate. Is this my decision to make? Should I ask and seek approval? Will I get in trouble?

That friction is exhausting. It drains energy that should go into the work.

Sarah fixed it in about ten minutes, with a whiteboard and an analogy about a tree.

If You’re the Smartest Person in the Room, Find a Different Room

Before I explain the model, I want to share a belief that underpins everything I do as a leader.

If you are genuinely the smartest person in every room you walk into, if your team regularly defers to you, can’t make decisions without you, and waits for your input before acting, that is not a sign of your capability. It’s a sign that something in how you lead needs to change.

Michael Dell put it plainly:

Try never to be the smartest person in the room. And if you are, invite smarter people, or find a different room. — Michael Dell

Steve Jobs said it differently, but the point is the same:

It doesn't make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do. We hire smart people so they can tell us what to do. — Steve Jobs

You hire experts to own their areas. If you’re then making all their decisions for them, ask yourself honestly: who is actually doing their job?

Why Empowerment Fails Without a Framework

Most leaders want to empower their teams. Very few actually do it well.

The problem isn’t intent. It’s the absence of a shared language for what empowered actually means. Without clarity, team members default to caution. They bring decisions upward because they don’t know which ones are theirs to make. Leaders, in turn, feel needed, even indispensable, and the cycle continues.

Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson’s research on psychological safety tells us that high-performing teams aren’t just technically skilled. They feel safe enough to take initiative, make calls, and flag problems without fear of punishment or humiliation. Psychological safety isn’t a soft concept; it’s a performance driver.

But safety alone isn’t enough. People also need to know what they’re safe to decide.

That’s where the Decision Tree comes in.

The Decision Tree: A Shared Language for Decision-Making

The Decision Tree is a simple model that categorises decisions by their level of impact and reversibility, and assigns ownership accordingly. Think of an actual tree: the further from the ground, the lighter the decision; the closer to the roots, the heavier.

Here’s how it works:

Leaf Decisions - Just Do It

Leaves are small, low-risk, fully reversible. These decisions belong entirely to the individual. No check-ins needed, no approval required.

Examples: how to structure your week, which tool to use for a task, how to word an email.

If someone on your team is still asking for permission on leaf decisions, that’s a signal they don’t feel safe. Fix the environment, not the person.

Branch Decisions - Act, Then Tell Me

Branch decisions are slightly bigger, still within the individual’s scope, but worth communicating after the fact. The expectation is: make the call, then loop me in so I know what happened.

Examples: a change to a process within your team, a shift in project approach, renegotiating a deadline with a stakeholder.

This is where most middle-ground decisions should live. Not escalated, not hidden; acted on and communicated.

Trunk Decisions - Talk First, Then Decide

These are decisions with broader impact. They affect other teams, involve meaningful resources, or are harder to reverse. The individual should bring their recommendation to the conversation, but the discussion happens before action.

Examples: budget changes, hiring decisions, changes to a product direction, significant scope adjustments.

Note: the team member is still expected to show up with a recommendation, not just a question. The leader’s job is to pressure-test, not to hand down the answer.

Root Decisions - Leadership Call

Root decisions are foundational. They shape the direction of the organisation itself. These are rare, but they carry significant weight and cannot be easily undone.

Examples: company strategy, structural changes, major partnerships, culture-defining choices.

These don’t get delegated. Not because of ego, but because they need the full context and accountability that only sits at the top.

What Sarah Did

Sarah drew this tree on a whiteboard and said something like: “Here’s how I think about decisions. Most of what you do every day is leaves and branches. I don’t need to know about those. If it’s a trunk decision, come to me with your recommendation and we’ll talk it through. Roots are mine.”

That was it.

Instantly, I knew what was mine. I knew where my authority started and ended. And I knew that Sarah trusted me to act, not to seek permission for every small thing, but to decide, to move, and to keep her informed where it mattered.

It sounds simple because it is. But simple is not the same as easy to implement. The model only works if the leader is genuinely willing to step back from the branch and leaf decisions, even when their instinct is to weigh in.

The Growth Engine Hidden in the Model

Here’s what I’ve come to appreciate most about the Decision Tree: it’s also a career development framework.

When someone joins your team, they may start with mostly leaf decisions. They’re still learning the domain, the culture, the stakes. Over time, as they demonstrate judgement and earn trust, the trunk and branch decisions start to shift their way. Getting to make a trunk decision isn’t just a tactical win, it signals growth.

That sense of progression matters. People who feel empowered to make decisions relevant to their expertise tend to be more motivated, more accountable, and more likely to stay.

How to Start

You don’t need a workshop or a strategy offsite to implement this. Here’s what I’d suggest:

1. Draw the tree with your team. Put it on a whiteboard (or digital whiteboard), explain the four levels, and run through a few real examples together. Let the team categorise some recent decisions. You’ll quickly see where there’s been confusion.

2. Name the level when you assign work. When you hand something to someone, tell them what kind of decision it is: “This is yours, branch level. Move on it and let me know what you decided.”

3. Resist the pull to get involved in leaf decisions. When someone brings you a leaf and you answer it, you’ve just told them implicitly that they need your input on leaves. That’s hard to undo.

4. Review and promote. As your team grows in confidence, actively move decision types from trunk to branch to leaf for individuals. Make it explicit: “I think you’re ready to own this class of decisions without looping me in.”

The Leader’s Real Job

True leadership is not about having the answers. It’s about building the conditions in which other people can find them.

The Decision Tree won’t make you redundant. It will free you to focus on the root decisions, the ones that actually need your full attention, while your team runs with everything else.

Give your people the tree. Tell them which branches are theirs. Then get out of the way and watch them grow.

---

The Decision Tree model is widely attributed to On Your Feet and has been explored in depth by leadership writers including Ben Morton and TechTello. Amy Edmondson’s research on psychological safety is published in Administrative Science Quarterly (1999).