The Permission Paradox: Your Governance Model might be Killing Speed.

In many companies, governance is seen as a handbrake. But think of a Ferrari: The brakes aren't there just to stop the car; they provide the confidence to take corners at speed.

The problem? The "Context Gap." This is where a Steering Committee has no feel for the local market, yet makes decisions based on a slide deck rather than reality.

The best organisations have stopped "Delegating Authority" and started "Escalating Risk."

Here is what that looks like in practice:

Amazon:

The "One-Way Door" (Strategic Velocity) Jeff Bezos doesn't govern by budget codes; he governed by reversibility.
• Type 1 (One-Way Doors): Irreversible, high stakes (e.g., M&A). Governance: Heavy central review.
• Type 2 (Two-Way Doors): Reversible (e.g., new features). Governance: "Just do it." If it fails, reverse it.
• The Lesson: Stop treating reversible experiments like irreversible risks.

The U.S. Navy:

"Intent-Based Leadership" Capt. L. David Marquet (USS Santa Fe) realised waiting for permission on a nuclear sub was dangerous.

He shifted the language from "Request permission to..." to "I intend to..."

This forces the subordinate to own the psychological safety of the decision.
• The Captain shifts from Approver to Monitor.
• Closer gap between Authority and Information.

The Takeaway In a healthy culture, the question shifts from "Am I allowed to do this?" to "What is the cost if I am wrong?"

Governance shouldn't be about stopping people from doing the wrong thing. It should be about enabling people to do the right thing, faster.