Library skill · Thinkers' principles

Matsushita-style collective-wisdom review

v1.0.1 · Updated 4 November 2026

Plans how a decision gathers the knowledge of the people who do the work, and checks the decider listens openly first, following the collective wisdom Konosuke Matsushita practised. Use it when you are about to decide something that changes many people's work.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by Konosuke Matsushita or their companies. About these principles: Konosuke Matsushita's ideas, explained.

Add to my team's pod

Works in Claude, ChatGPT, and coding agents. On Team and Business, this library skill in your pod updates itself when we improve it.

When to use it

You are about to decide something that changes many people's work
Your team's ideas never reach decisions, or a suggestion scheme has gone quiet

What you give it

The decision, the decider and the date
Who knows something about it
The decider's current view
How input is gathered today

What you get

A plan that maps who knows what, the questions to ask, how input stays safe, and a table to record what came in and what changed the decision.

How it works

Write the decision and the decider One line each. If the decision is already made, say so: asking for input then is theatre, and people notice.
Map who knows what (principle 1) List the groups whose daily work gives them knowledge the decider lacks: the people who do the task, handle the complaint, run the machine, talk to the supplier. Note what each group probably knows that the decider doesn't.
Write the decider's current view, then set it aside (principle 3) State it in one sentence, then list what would change it. This makes room to hear contrary input.
Pick the mechanism (principle 2) Match it to the group: a short conversation on the floor, a two-question written form, a review of a draft, a standing suggestion channel. Each question asks for facts from their work, not opinions on the conclusion ("What goes wrong on Friday deliveries?").
Make it safe and visible Say who sees the input, that disagreement is wanted, and when people will hear what was decided.
Gather and sort Group what came in by theme, with counts and sources. Mark input that contradicts the decider's view first.
Decide and close the loop The decider chooses, says which input changed the decision and which didn't and why, and thanks people by name where they agree to it.
Review the mechanism After the decision: did anyone outside the usual voices contribute? If not, change the mechanism next time.

Share it with your team

Add it to an AI Skill Pod and everyone on the team, contractors included, uses the same version from their own AI. Read the best ways to share AI skills with a team