Expand Your Philosophy: Finding Flow in the Pattern Between Choices and Decisions – The Art of Triage and How We Decide Together

Short principles for long-term clarity—and occasional epiphanies.

How does our decision-making style define us and how does conflict emerge?

“The way we make decisions can weigh on us - but greater strain comes from the clash of styles. When we honour each other's decision-making rhythms, we move forward with respect, clarity, and wiser choices.”

Are you sometimes accused of only seeing the forest, not the trees? Or maybe the opposite - accused of agonising over which trees are best, but ending up in the wrong forest?

When my wife and I plan a trip, we’re never stuck on going - we get stuck on how we decide: where, what, and how to do it. I like to make quick, confident choices. She prefers to explore every possibility.

Neither approach is wrong - we think differently. But the friction is real.

I’ve come to see these as two ends of a spectrum: choice-centric (deliberate, analytical) and decision-centric (instinctive, intuitive). You likely shift depending on context but favour one. One thrives on exploring all options. The other values swift clarity. Both are valid – simply, different. When we understand what each brings to the table, we can better recognise the strengths and pitfalls of different decision-making styles. That awareness helps you make stronger decisions and speak more clearly about how you make them - turning potential conflict into collaboration.

My wife’s style is choice-centric and thrives on exploring permutations, analysing choice, and maximising the plan - evaluating all available options before landing on a decision. In contrast, my decision-centric approach prefers early decisions to avoid choice overload and preserving energy - leveraging instincts, patterns, and iteration. In a different context - like leadership - decision-style awareness helps avoid dominating discussions or drowning in strategy spirals. It might seem at face value like one style is better than another based on context – but this isn’t always the case. They have different strengths and weaknesses to understand.

The strengths of these approaches lie in their ability to capture different elements of the decision-making process. Choice-centric thinking compares, optimises, and spots inconsistencies. It shines when decisions are complex, options are limited, and time allows for research. It’s especially effective for future-proofing plans with contingencies and aligning constraints with purpose. This approach provides optimal outcomes based on available information and is excellent for maximising quality.

On the flipside, a decision-centric approach frees up energy for execution and experience while remaining agile, efficient, and adaptive in changing conditions. It can be incredibly beneficial when there are lots of options, the environment is fast-paced, and the cost of inaction is high - where taking action matters more than optimisation. This approach fuels momentum - driven by agility, adaptability, and smart energy use. It’s ideal for fast-moving environments or situations that evolve rapidly over time.

Each style has its own traps. One gets stuck in overthinking; the other can sprint into decisions that don’t hold up later. That’s why understanding both is more than self-awareness - it’s strategic clarity. Choice-centric decision-making risks paralysis or exhaustion from endless permutations; it’s prone to perfectionism, overwhelm, mental overload, burnout, or control issues – it may cause stress in them and others when detail overload becomes unmanageable.

However, a decision-centric approach can be biased, overlook important data, seem dismissive of planning needs and create tension with collaborators who rely on thoroughness or plan communication. Possibly resulting in regret or frustration if early decisions create long-term inefficiencies and are prone to impulsivity based solely on "gut" which is often misaligned with reality.

It’s worth noting - your decision-making style has little bearing on the ethics of the decision itself – you can make an ethically corrupt or hurtful decision either way, this is more about the process people go through.

If you’re nodding along so far, you may already sense where this is leading: the middle ground. What happens when we blend the best of both approaches?

Pattern-centric thinking begins when you start exploring and developing skills from the opposite style and begin leaning into the middle of the spectrum. Borrowing even 20% makes your decisions not only faster - but often more accurate. It blends research, insight, intuition, and re-evaluation to triage options and act with focus. Rather than prioritising ‘what’s right’ it prioritises what matters most - right now. It’s about knowing when to constrain, when to explore, and how to shift styles. Pattern-centric thinkers know when to pause and when to pounce.

They often pause to ask questions that help them decide how to decide:

• “Do I need to understand all options first, or narrow the pool with a quick choice?”

• “Do I need more information or to cull options?”

• “Which constraints could help me?”

• “What are the outliers telling me?”

• “If my initial assessment was wrong, how much damage could that cause?”

This style is especially strong at triaging priorities - rapidly filtering and acting without getting stuck or being reckless. Which, really, is the point of decision-making.

Effective pattern-centric decision-makers blend quick judgment with sufficient analysis - triaging based on the severity, relevance, and urgency of both positive and negative consequences. It maximises outcomes while avoiding overload or rashness - constantly evaluating and recalibrating position as it goes.

Why does this all matter? It matters because it helps you make better decisions and communicate more clearly about how you make them – if you love choice analysis, maybe it’s better for your sanity to constrain it a little. And if you make decisions quickly, you might get great leverage out of exploring more choice.

It also plays a major role in communication - especially under conflict. Every context and relationship positions us as more or less choice- or decision-centric relative to our counterpart or situation, meaning there’s always potential for friction. We often think we’re arguing about the flower arrangements or the budget. But we’re really arguing about how we make decisions - and the level of certainty each of us needs. When these styles clash without awareness, one person tends to dominate while the other shuts down. It’s not about the flowers. It’s about friction in the process.

Under pressure, dominant styles override collaborative needs. Misunderstanding the how of decision-making causes stress, resentment, and power struggles in teams and relationships. So, if both approaches exist with strengths and pitfalls - what can we do about it?

This connects to something we often overlook: how conflict and communication intersect. At its core, communication is a tool to relay information about the things we think and feel from one person to another – conflict is what happens when there is resistance or misunderstanding. Understanding these decision-styles is key to help effectively communicate in relationships and teamwork. Conflict often stems from mismatched decision logics - especially when urgency is working against you. The dominant communicator, not necessarily the best approach, usually dictates the process. This creates hidden resentment, stress, or feelings of being overridden.

Let’s pause here - what’s your general style?

Do you get overwhelmed by too many permutations - spiralling into detail fatigue? Or do you feel frustrated when asked to justify instinctive decisions you’ve already made?

That’s the tension point.

When one person seeks more options while the other just wants to choose and move on, friction builds fast. Without mutual recognition, someone ends up shouldering the load - or unknowingly steamrolling the process. Without balance, you or someone you care about ends up carrying the burden that should be shared - and it can feel lonely and pressurised. Over time, this leads to resentment, decision fatigue, and exuberant, unhelpful arguments. Naming your decision styles isn’t just a communication tool - it’s an act of respect. It creates space for shared responsibility and adaptive collaboration.

The path forward is collaborative design. You can co-create the decision-making process - honouring both your styles and delegating by strengths - designing shared rituals grounded in mutual respect and understanding. If you're choice-centric, give the decision-centric bite-sized, clear options to eliminate, select from, or react to - early and often.  If you're decision-centric, honour the need to assess wider opportunities by offering more than one possibility – giving your counterpart time to compare choices, even if you’ve already chosen your favourite. Collaboration is not compromise - it’s about clarity of method and compatibility of process.

The goal isn’t to force one way of deciding - but to understand your own, and honour the styles of those you care about. When we do that, we don’t just make better decisions - we build better relationships.

Somewhere between impulse and analysis lies a rhythm. When you learn it, you don’t just decide better - you connect more deeply. Let that rhythm guide you.

🗝️ Three Paths to Make This Yours - Unlock Your Understanding:

• 🧠 The Thinker’s Path: Build a matrix comparing your past 5 decisions - log the style, outcome, and where analysis helped or hurt.

• 🌿 The Wanderer’s Path: Create a simple decision flow: choose when to wander, and when to constrain for momentum.

• 🔥 The Challenger’s Path: Call out one recurring decision dynamic in a key relationship - and propose a new way to approach it.

The truth is simple and hard: You’re always one choice away from a new path.

🧭 The Compass of Curiosity - A Pause, A Question, A Shift:

• Imagine you’re not allowed to make a decision yet - you must seriously consider 3 to 5 different options and present them to someone with more power or authority than you. What would those options be? Why is each one both promising and problematic when compared to the others? Do your best to describe the trade-offs.

• Imagine you’re forced to decide immediately - there’s no time to deliberate, and lives (including yours) are on the line. What are your top 5 instinctive choices? What constraints - like time, values, or available resources - helped you choose so quickly?

• Imagine you’re clashing with a partner about what direction to take. One of you is pushing for fast action and iterative progress; the other for careful analysis and deliberate choice. What’s valid about each approach? What might a “famous compromise” look like - balancing speed, scope, and sustainable impact?

🔥 Two Sparks to Light Your Thinking - Dare To Challenge The Ordinary:

• Pause before your next big decision and name your default style - then try the opposite.

• Co-create a decision ritual with someone who thinks differently than you do – how often they come to you with information, and what choices they bring.

🎶 Resonance in Rhythm - Melodies That Echo Meaning:

• Grow As We Go - Ben Platt

• Clarity – Caskets

• Hurricane – Slowly Slowly

• Brave – Peter Hollins

• It’s Not My Time – 3 Doors Down

📖 Wonderer’s Toolkit* - Resources For The Inquisitive Mind:

• Clear Thinking - Shane Parrish (Amazon)

• Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) - Carol Tavris (Amazon)

• The 80/20 Principle: The Secret to Achieving More with Less - Richard Koch (Amazon)

• The Way of Integrity - Martha Beck (Amazon)

• Dare To Lead - Brené Brown (Amazon)

• Want More Recommendations?

*These are Amazon Affiliate links through which you can support the blog

Hard-won truths. Delivered with wonder!

Receive Wisdom

Next Thought Voyager:

• 00
  Days
• 00
  Hours
• 00
  Minutes
• 00
  Seconds

🌌 More Wonderings Beyond This Path – Curiosity Leads, Wonder Follows:

In the Same Vein – Keep Wondering

A New Trail to Wonder

Looking for Something Else?

• Want to Read a Poem?

• Keen to Explore More Topics?

• What About Bite-Sized Wisdom?

• Or Maybe be Allowed into my Inner Sanctum

• Would Rather Come Back Later?