The Authority Map.
Decide, consent, consult, inform. Applied to a real consequence-heavy decision, the map makes the structural break visible in under a minute.
A senior hire as the worked example.
Most teams know about decide, consent, consult, and inform as a framework. The frame becomes useful when it is applied to a specific decision rather than discussed in general. The example below: a senior operator hire at a venture-backed private company.
Four roles, one decision, no overlap.
Decide. One seat. The person who is on the hook for the decision. Not a committee, not a consensus. When the room cannot name the decider in one sentence, the structure is the problem, not the information.
Consent. The seat with the right to block, not the right to choose. On a senior hire, the board often holds consent on compensation above a threshold or on title. Consent is narrow and named.
Consult. Voice without vote. People whose input is required because of context they hold. Their input shapes the decision. It does not override the decider.
Inform. People who need to know after the decision is made. Communication, not approval. The most common subtle error is to treat people who should be informed as people who should be consulted.
The map is most useful when it is drawn for a specific decision and shared. When the seats are visible and the decision is named, the structural cause of stuckness usually becomes obvious. See Consent Rights And Authority for the deeper read on the consent seat.
Where to go from here.
The map is most useful when applied. The next pages take it deeper.