On the surface, consulting everyone and deciding by consensus seems like a no-brainer, the perfect model for making any and all decisions. Its rationale is that   every decision should reflect an equal amount of input from all parties, interested or otherwise.

For centuries, the importance of individual voices in decision making has been enshrined in Western thought. One of our collective narratives out of this era   is that in a democracy, everybody should have a voice. The problem is the bigger the state/organization/company and the more political parties, legislators and special interests in the mix, the more difficult arriving at a consensus becomes. Seth Godin illustrates this problem in his book Linchpin when he notes that coordination of handshakes gets increasingly complex when you add more people into the mix. While the idea of being heard is very important, it is important to recognize that since most of us are faced with hundreds of decisions every week, many mediated by other people, it is nearly impossible to have the same level of input on each decision.

Despite the complexity of large organizations, like governments or large companies, it is possible for consensus to be reached. In order to foster effective consensus-based decision making, practical logistics have to be exercised. There also needs to be a mechanism for making a final decision to move forward, even though there may be some opposition. Steve Jobs called this “shipping” a project – a project is nothing unless it’s ontime and complete.

I grew up in a church with a consensus-based model, and one thing I noticed was that every issue was always up for discussion, and if someone wanted to re-open an issue and put a halt to implementation, it was easily done. Meanwhile, other churches seemed to have different ways of doing things – there was equal and open   discussion, but once a decision was brought to a vote, they moved on to new business – no re-opening the old decision.   In some ways, this model was preferable because it was more efficient. While both scenarios were “consensus-based”, one was far more efficient than the other.

To enable pragmatic, efficient consensus-based decision making, here are some simple rules to follow:

1. Learn who the stakeholders are and make sure that collectively they each have a voice.

2. Help articulate the major themes for each group.

3. Listen to the values of each group, and what drives them to be there (often this is more meaningful than the issue).

4. Thrash early, not late. Ask Seth Godin if you have questions about this.

5. Focus on common ground.

6. Commit to making a decision by a certain date and then implementing it. If no consensus can be reached, agree to an amicable “no-deal”.

7. Don’t confuse people with problems. Breakthroughs often happen when people get to know each other better.

8. Tell corny jokes like, “A termite walks into a bar and asks, ‘Hey, is the bar tender here?’”

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this post with your friends!