In most organizations, decisions get spread thin. A recommendation moves through a committee. A committee passes a paper to a board. A board acknowledges a memo from a function. By the time the decision is made, the decision has no author. If it works, the credit is shared. If it fails, the cost is shared too. Nothing is owned.
The work is different in organizations where the people closest to the work are the people making the decisions. There is no layer between the analysis and the commitment. The person who reads the situation is the person who calls it. The person who calls it carries what follows.
Models inform. Judgment commits. The two are not the same. A model can describe the world as it is. Only a person can choose what to do about it. The choice is the work, and the work has a name attached.
This is not heroic individualism. It is operating discipline. When decisions have names attached, the quality of the decision rises, because the person making it knows the consequence will return to them. When decisions are anonymous, the quality drifts, because the consequence drifts.
The institutions that endure are not the ones that ride swings in the environment. They are the ones that hold the line through them. Holding the line requires that the people on the line are real, named, and accountable. There is no other version of it.