Blog Post
Beyond the Framework: A Coach’s Perspective on Cognitive Drift and Decision-Making
After we published our recent blog, “Why Your Company’s Decision-Making Frameworks Become Less Diverse Over Time”, one of our favourite coaches Adam Quiney sent through a set of reflections from the field.
We’re sharing them here because they push the conversation further — challenging some of the assumptions that often come with frameworks, tools, and leadership ideals.
This isn’t a rebuttal. It’s a lens from someone who works directly with leaders and teams, who sees how drift plays out not just in data, but in daily culture.
Cognitive Drift Starts Earlier Than We Think
In our original post, we referenced Dr Juliet Bourke’s work, which shows that leaders shape not just the outcomes of decisions, but also the way others frame problems and solutions.
Adam expanded this:
“People learn how to lead not just from what a leader says or does — but from what gets attention, what gets rewarded, and what gets noticed. It doesn’t just shape decision frameworks — it shapes perception itself. People unconsciously start filtering what they see, what they raise, and what they suppress.”
In other words, drift doesn’t start at the decision point. It starts much earlier — in attention, in reward systems, in emotional safety.
It’s Not Just That Decision-Making Narrows — Perception Does Too
We described cognitive drift as the narrowing of decision-making over time. Adam offered a sharper interpretation:
“It’s not just that your decision-making narrows. It’s that your capacity to perceive that it’s narrowed also shrinks. You lose access to the very frameworks that would let you recognise the drift.”
This is a key insight. It’s not enough to tell leaders to “make broader decisions.” If the lens they’re looking through has already narrowed, they won’t even realise something is missing.
The Limitations of the “Inclusive Leader” Model
We referenced Juliet Bourke’s finding that inclusive leadership can reduce decision error by up to 30%.
But here’s Adam's take:
“Everyone believes they’re inclusive. But that belief sits inside their own limited framework. Most leaders are biased against seeing the extent of their narrowing. Even when presented with new insights, they may just use that information to reaffirm their original decision.”
The risk isn’t just lack of inclusivity — it’s the illusion of inclusivity. Without reflection and external challenge, “inclusive” can become a label we give ourselves while continuing to operate within a closed loop.
Frameworks Aren’t Enough Without Mirrors
Tools like Wizer help map and measure decision-making frameworks. But Adam reminded us:
“Tools are a starting point. But what’s needed is strong, ongoing, recurring mirrors that reflect drift back to leaders in ways they can’t ignore — and do so inside a container of commitment.”
This is where coaching, facilitation, and structured feedback loops matter. Without human reflection, even the best data can get rationalised or misused.
Drift Is Inevitable — But It Doesn’t Have to Be Invisible
Finally, Adam left us with a sobering — but empowering — reminder:
“Cognitive drift is essential and unavoidable in every human system. The idea that we can ‘catch it early’ and prevent it altogether is tempting… but unrealistic. The real work is in building systems that can notice drift as it happens, and support people in recalibrating as they go.”
Adam put it best:
“The only way to discover our path is to drift off it — and realise we’ve strayed.”
Closing Thought
Cognitive drift is real. It’s measurable. And it’s also human.
Frameworks, data, and mapping are essential. But so is grounded practice. So is reflection. So is holding up the mirror — even when the image it shows is uncomfortable.
We’re grateful to the coaches and practitioners who help bring that mirror into the room, again and again.
