I came across something recently that caught my attention. Spotify’s executives have banned the words “offline” and “later” in leadership meetings. At first, it sounds like a linguistic tweak. But it connects to a deeper idea about how they make decisions — through what they call bets.

Twice a year, Spotify’s senior leaders hold a “bet pitch” cycle. Each executive brings a small number of proposals backed by data and conviction. They pitch them to peers, debate trade-offs, and rank which bets deserve investment for the next six months. Around 30 to 50 ideas are discussed, but only a fraction move forward. Every bet follows a simple framework called DIBB: data, insight, belief, and bet. The goal is to trace each strategic move from observed data through a formed belief to a deliberate wager. The company maintains a visible bets board to track which bets are active, what progress is being made, and how learning feeds back into the next cycle.

What I find intriguing is not the process itself but the mindset underneath it. By calling strategic initiatives “bets,” Spotify’s leaders acknowledge uncertainty. They make commitments with humility — not as promises, but as informed experiments. That language helps normalize risk and learning at the leadership level.

Most of us already make bets, whether we call them that or not. We prioritize, invest, and make trade-offs with imperfect information. The difference is whether we acknowledge the uncertainty openly and design for learning. Spotify’s example simply makes that visible.

So how might we explore a similar approach in our own environments?

  • Start small. Choose one leadership cycle or team planning period and frame a few initiatives explicitly as bets. Write down the reasoning behind each: what data suggests the opportunity, what insight follows, and what belief drives your action.

  • Make it visible. You do not need a company-wide board. A single shared document or visual tracker works. The key is clarity about what is being tried and why.

  • Review and re-rank. At regular intervals, revisit the bets. Which ones paid off, which did not, and what was learned? Treat “ending” a bet as success if it saved time or revealed a new insight.

  • Adapt as you go. You may find that a structured betting process feels heavy. Or that it surfaces sharper discussions. The point is not to replicate Spotify’s method, but to experiment with the mindset.

I do not know yet if this approach would fit every culture or leadership rhythm. But it raises a useful question: what would change if our leadership teams treated strategy less like a plan to execute and more like a portfolio of educated wagers?

We may not need Spotify’s full framework to benefit from the pattern. The real learning lies in making our choices visible, testing our convictions, and building a rhythm of decision and reflection that suits our context.