The cover of Fortune magazine popped off the newsstand shelf last week [Aug. 15, 2011] with the article, “What Happened at Pfizer: The Inside Story of Revenge, Betrayal, and Power at the Top of the World’s Largest Drug Company.”

Amidst the story that recounted epic boardroom intrigue, one section described the impact that these political shenanigans had on day-to-day decision making.

“A second anonymous letter, claiming to be from ‘responsible, long and loyal Legal Division employees,’ arrived on the very day of the board meeting. It complained of ‘micromanagement,’ ‘constant’ internal reorganization, and a ‘chaotic’ decision-making process. ‘A decision is made, then reconsidered and changed. Decisions, even minor… are picked apart and often directed to be undone. Then re-studied. Then the decision-making group expands. Paranoia results. Autonomy is sapped.’”

When it comes to fuzzy authority and recycled decisions, Pfizer is not alone. Wherever it occurs, at whatever level, the organization is seriously impacted. It matters how decisions are made. Nothing is more revealing about the leadership and the future of an organization than how decisions are made.

 …