A pint of prevention equals a gallon of cure. Every dollar invested in prevention saves 10 in response. The variation of sayings like these are many. The most common current one has been about flattening the curve.
And the hardest part of the argument or the selling of the prevention is that when it works, people say we overreacted and it wasn’t that bad. Oddly, rarely is the connection made between the preventative action taken and disaster resilience or the flattened curve.
Talking about actual harms, potential long term harms or negative consequences of actions makes one the ‘spoil sport’ and often unwelcome to the discussion. Maybe the message needs to be communicated in new ways, but it doesn’t make the message less true.
If you are having a team meeting to discuss a decision and there is no disagreement, there was no need for the meeting. Diversity of opinion should be sought out, encouraged, not shunned. Understanding the future impact of decisions you make today is never clear, there are too many variables. There will be potential benefits and potential harms, both have dependencies and reality often is a bit a both. If it is a benefit or a harm likely will depend on your perspective and from where you are viewing.
Seek out the different opinion, welcome it, engage with it. Your decision may not change, but how you implement it or how you monitor it likely will.
And no, it is not easy. It’s very hard. Do it anyway.