The more people there are involved in a decision, the longer that decision takes to be made. If you're in a large company, everyone has an opinion.

This framework is useful to explicitly determine who is and isn't in the decision making process.

In other words, it's a good way to nicely say... "Back the F off!" to people that don't need to be involved.

I often find it's also correlated with the number of people affected. If you start making decisions for the entire organization (as though that ever works) everybody has to be involved, because anybody no involved will see this new policy wielded as a weapon by the people who were involved.

I believe making decisions fast is much less about cutting down the number of deciders, and way more about cutting down the impact. Essentially, make local decisions.

There are methods to force a decision through, even with large/uninteresting groups. For example, putting a default course of action on the table up front and asking if there are objections or better alternatives. Another example is highlighting the cost of not making a decision via organizational communication (“X is still blocked on a decision” etc, and repeat that weekly).