Few distinctions in decision-making matter more than reversibility. A reversible decision can be changed cheaply later; an irreversible one is costly or difficult to unwind. The same idea appears under different names: Jeff Bezos calls them Type 1 (irreversible) and Type 2 (reversible) decisions, while other frameworks describe one-way and two-way doors. Mistaking Type 1 for Type 2 produces premature commitment and under-analyzed risks; mistaking Type 2 for Type 1 produces slow execution and risk aversion where speed would have served better.
Reversibility sets the appropriate pace. Teams should make reversible decisions quickly because the downside of being wrong is manageable, and momentum is itself a resource. Two practical heuristics follow. First, set a decision deadline, the latest useful point to choose before delay becomes more expensive than uncertainty; this is the antidote to analysis paralysis, since postponing choice does not eliminate risk, it only shifts its cost. Second, follow the 70% rule: if you wait for 90% of the information, you are probably too slow, since most good decisions are made with about 70% of what you would ideally want.
Some decisions warrant more than speed. A high-leverage decision shapes many later outcomes, options, or constraints, and an irreversible decision with serious stakes deserves real care. Several reflective techniques help. Regret minimization asks which option you would regret least looking back from old age; the test of imagination variant asks which choice you can imagine being proud of. The 10/10/10 rule (Welch) asks how you will feel about a choice in 10 minutes, 10 months, and 10 years. A decision is actionable when it carries a clear choice, a named owner, a set of next steps, and a timeframe for execution or review. The aim is to separate speed from haste: speed is swift action with adequate process; haste is rushed action that skips process. Conflating them leads to either paralysis or recklessness.