Reversible decisions like inventory levels can be changed fast, but locked-in ones like manufacturing footprint take years to shift. Most companies apply the same strict approval process to both, which kills speed. Treat them differently: heavy testing for locked-in choices, quick calls for reversible ones.
If I can step in, Max, I think one discipline that has become very important to us is distinguishing between the decisions that are reversible and those that are effectively locked in. So what I see from the reversible decisions is something like allocation changes, safety stock positioning, the inventory mix, so on and so forth. So these are, these are the ones which are reversible. We can quickly course correct them while the locked-in decisions are now in this scenario more so about, you know, how do you fix your network, your manufacturing network footprint, I mean, how do you pick up your CapEx, which is the major commitments towards expansion, so on and so forth. So how are you really shaping your cost structure and ones that take years for you to kind of course correct? So those are the ones which are, in my view, are the locked-in decisions. Okay. What I often see organizations applying is the same governance to rigor all the decisions. Now I think that also kind of impacts So if you look at it from the reversible and locked-in decisions, uh, to be more— to be fast and decentralized, uh, that could be one of the options that effectively we are working on right now is how do you heavily, uh, scenario test, uh, with the cross-functionality alignment to be, to be sure about it. Interesting. Yeah.
