How to say “Describe easily influenced” professionally

Level 1: We've observed a degree of variability in project direction, often influenced by external perspectives. Establishing clearer decision-making frameworks could enhance our overall project stability and focus.

Level 2: To optimize our project delivery and resource allocation, ensuring that external insights are synthesized into a singular, well-defined strategic direction will be crucial. This would help us maintain focus and avoid potential diversions.

Level 3: Our current agile framework, while emphasizing adaptability, appears to be generating a high degree of scope fluidity. Perhaps we need to revisit the 'Definition of Done' for our steering committee, ensuring that 'final' truly means final, thereby reducing the overhead associated with continuous re-prioritization cycles.

Level 4: The frequent shifts in project scope, often influenced by new external input, are significantly impacting our team's productivity and morale. Without a consistent, unwavering direction, we risk project delays and potential budget overruns.

Level 5: Just pick something, anything.

Level 1: To ensure optimal project delivery and alignment with the initial vision, we recommend maintaining a focused scope. Frequent shifts, while accommodating, can impact our ability to meet original timelines effectively.

Level 2: We appreciate your openness to evolving ideas and stakeholder feedback. To best manage project resources and deliverables, it would be beneficial to periodically re-anchor to our agreed-upon Statement of Work and core objectives.

Level 3: Our 'Adaptive Scope Integration Protocol,' as outlined in Appendix C of the MSA, allows for incremental adjustments. However, the current velocity of 'vision recalibration' necessitates a review of the original 'Success Metrics Matrix' to ensure our efforts align with the initially commissioned 'value proposition,' and not just the latest PowerPoint presentation from a third-party consultant.

Level 4: Each significant change in direction, often influenced by new external input, directly impacts the project timeline and budget. We need to adhere to the established scope or formally initiate a change order process to manage these adjustments.

Level 5: Just sign something already.

Level 1: When collaborating, I've noted that [Coworker's Name] demonstrates a high degree of openness to new ideas. For critical path decisions, ensuring a consistent approach would benefit our collective deliverables.

Level 2: To maintain project momentum, it's often beneficial to establish a clear decision baseline early on. While [Coworker's Name] is very receptive to feedback, solidifying key choices would prevent unnecessary re-work.

Level 3: As per our team's 'Dynamic Consensus Protocol,' I've observed [Coworker's Name]'s impressive ability to recalibrate their stance based on the latest input. Perhaps a pre-mortem before each 'final' decision point could help solidify the 'post-mortem' results, reducing iterative loops.

Level 4: The frequent changes in direction from [Coworker's Name], often after a new conversation, are creating inefficiencies and requiring us to re-do work. We need a more consistent approach to avoid project delays.

Level 5: They'll agree with anyone.