In enterprise management, it is important not to use regional labels to simply classify employees' abilities or personalities. As a province with a developed economy and a leading level of education in China, Jiangsu has a high degree of professionalism and innovation in its talent resources. If you want to improve the efficiency of team decision-making, it is recommended to adopt the following strategies from the perspective of scientific management： ###1. Optimize the decision-making process mechanism 1. **Establish a hierarchical authorization system** Clarify the decision-making authority of different levels (such as budget amount and project type), and define roles and responsibilities through the RACI matrix (responsibility allocation matrix) to avoid delays caused by vague authority and responsibilities. 2. **Introduce an agile decision-making framework** Adopt the principle of "time box" in Scrum management, set a phased decision deadline (such as a 48-hour rapid decision-making meeting), and support a data board and a real-time feedback system. 3. **Build a decision support system** Develop an intelligent platform that includes industry big data analysis, risk assessment models, and historical case databases to provide quantitative decision-making basis for cautious employees. ###2. Strengthen the effectiveness of organizational communication 1. **Implement a reverse reporting system** Employees are required to attach three feasible solutions when raising questions, and to force decision-making thinking training through the "problem + solution" reporting model. 2. **Carry out preview-style decision-making training** Through immersive training such as sand table simulation and business war games, stress scenarios such as market mutations and supply chain crises are set up to cultivate the ability to make quick decisions. 3. **Establish a cross-departmental decision-making mechanism for gambling** Set up an AB plan for important decisions, allowing different teams to implement them separately and verify the results within a limited period of time, so as to enhance the decision-making momentum through healthy internal competition. ###3. Reshaping the genes of corporate culture 1. **Implement a culture of "smart fault tolerance"** Set up an annual innovation fault tolerance fund (the recommended ratio is 0.5%-1% of profits) to systematically tolerate decision-making errors that have been reviewed by the process. 2. **Establish a decision-making quality evaluation system** Develop a decision-making power model that includes dimensions such as timeliness, innovation, and risk controllability, and link the evaluation results to talent inventory and promotion channels. 3. **Implement decision visualization projects** The decision-making path is disclosed through the OKR system, and the decision-making timeline is displayed using the Gantt diagram to form a transparent decision-making tracking mechanism. ###4. Avoid regional cognitive biases 1. **Conduct unconscious bias training** Through tools such as Harvard University's IAT hidden association test, it helps managers identify and eliminate the influence of regional stereotypes. 2. **Establish a talent ability coordinate system** Replace regional labels with the Jiugongge talent matrix (performance-potential model), focusing on individual business acumen, risk appetite and other professional qualities. 3. **Implement decision-making style diagnosis** Introduce tools such as HBDI whole-brain thinking assessment and decision-making style scale to optimize job suitability based on individual cognitive characteristics. Contemporary enterprise management has entered the stage of "data-driven and precise empowerment". It is recommended that your company focus on the digital transformation of the decision-making process, and realize the spiral improvement of decision-making efficiency and quality through systematic projects such as building an intelligent decision-making center, cultivating a T-type talent echelon, and optimizing the organizational mental model. Any simple attribution based on geography may cause talent misjudgment and hidden loss of organizational effectiveness.