Why “Let’s circle back” usually means nobody wants to make the decision

There are certain phrases that sound sensible, professional and reassuringly corporate while achieving almost nothing. Here’s a few of them:

• “Let’s take this offline.”
• “We should socialise the idea.”
• “We need to align the stakeholders.”

And: our flavour for the day:

• “Let’s circle back.”

Sometimes important information is missing, the right person is not in the room or something genuinely needs more thought. Fair enough.

But quite often, “Let’s circle back” means something else entirely:
Nobody wants to take the responsibility for making a decision.

The meeting that produces another meeting

You have probably been there. A question is raised, several people offer opinions and the discussion goes round in increasingly impressive circles. Forty minutes later, everyone has spoken, absolutely nothing has been decided and someone finally says: “Perhaps we should circle back next week.”

Everybody nods. PHEW! The meeting ends. A new meeting appears in the calendar.
Progress!

Except, of course, there has been no progress at all. The decision has merely been moved from one Tuesday to another.

The problem is rarely a complete lack of information. More often, the decision just feels, well, uncomfortable. What if someone disagrees? What if someone gets disappointed? The person making the call might later be blamed if things go sideways.

So the team keeps discussing. Taking notes. Tries to look clever but feeling a bit, well, not so clever…

Why clever people keep delaying

Decision avoidance can look surprisingly intelligent. It often arrives carrying spreadsheets, risk analyses and requests for additional data.

A Blue may genuinely want more information before committing. A Green may worry about the consequences for everybody involved. A Yellow may introduce another exciting possibility just as the group is finally reaching a conclusion. A Red may demand a quick decision, provided someone else is prepared to take responsibility for it.

Different behaviour. Same result. Nothing happens.

The longer the discussion continues, the easier it becomes to believe that even more discussion is exactly what the situation requires. Eventually, people are no longer trying to make the right decision. They are trying to avoid making the wrong one.

However … those are not the same things.

Ask what is actually missing

Before scheduling another meeting, ask:

• “What specific information do we still need?”
• “Who is actually responsible for this decision?”
• “What would happen if we decided today?”
• “What are we afraid might go wrong?”
• “When exactly will the decision be made?”

These questions have a nasty habit of exposing what is really going on.

If nobody can name the missing information, perhaps no information is missing. If nobody knows who owns the decision, that is probably the real problem.

And if the only reason for waiting is that somebody might be unhappy, then the group is not dealing with a data issue. It is dealing with discomfort.

Replace the phrase

The next time somebody says, “Let’s circle back,” resist the temptation to accept it automatically. Try this instead:

“What needs to be different when we circle back?”

That one question forces the group to identify what it expects to gain from waiting. Perhaps the answer is clear: new figures will arrive on Friday, the customer will respond on Monday or the legal team must review the contract.

Good. Then wait.

But if the answer sounds like, “We just need a little more time to think,” there is a strong possibility that the team already knows enough. Some decisions improve with time. Others simply grow older.

Know someone whose meetings always produce more meetings?

Forward this before they circle back again.