Insights (blog)

Decision science is unambiguous on one point: the quality of a decision is determined less by the intelligence of the individuals involved and more by the architecture of the group making it. This is the decision room — not the physical space, but the deliberate composition of who influences a decision, what thinking they bring, and whether the conditions exist for that thinking to be heard. Getting this right is not instinctive. It requires a different set of questions than

We recently sat down with James Healy, author of BS at Work  — a book cataloguing hundreds of examples of workplace practices that look credible, feel authoritative, and simply don't hold up to scrutiny. James has a simple litmus test he applies to almost everything in business: "Will this really work?" We asked him, out of all those stories, which two he'd pick as his favourites. His answer: DISC and Myers-Briggs. Two of the most widely used personality profiling tools in th

You'll hear the term talked about mostly in the context of AI — smarter systems, automated choices, faster analytics. And AI is part of it. But for us, decision intelligence starts somewhere else entirely. It starts with the humans making the decision, and whether the room they're in is actually designed to produce a good one. That is what Wizer is built around. And the more we've worked with leadership teams, boards, and organisations navigating genuinely complex decisions,

Revisiting the Challenger disaster alongside the Columbia investigation shifts the focus away from rockets and materials science and back into the room where the decisions were made. I’ve been listening to The Challenger Legacy  series on ABC recently, revisiting the Challenger disaster alongside the Columbia investigation. It is rocket science it is so important to have experts in the room but in both cases it was the decision room that lead to the deaths of all of these ast

Outbound teams have become very good at optimising what they can see. Messages get workshopped. Subject lines are debated. Send times are tweaked. Someone suggests adjusting the opening line so it feels warmer, or adding a personalisation detail because that’s what tends to lift results this quarter. None of that is careless. In fact, it’s usually quite thoughtful. And yet, anyone who has spent time close to outbound knows the frustration: messages that look strong on paper c

And how they scale it without losing the human part A lot of our best work at Wizer happens alongside coaches. Not because they need another tool — but because they’re already working at the point where decisions shape everything else. Culture. Trust. Momentum. Who gets heard. Who quietly switches off. Coaches are the ones sitting with leaders as they try to make sense of what’s really going on inside their teams. Helping them slow down, notice patterns, and see what’s shapin