Is everyone on board? A practical framework for effective group decisions.
Is everyone on board? A practical framework for effective group decisions.
“Consensus”, “Buy-In”, “Alignment”, and “Win Win Agreements” are all great ideas and have sold a lot of books. But, how does one practically achieve these ideals when things get real?
I once heard someone say, "Philosophers do shit" and that has stuck with me. Said another way, the most useful philosophy emerges from the need to do something, and having a thoughtful framework that promotes your intended outcomes will make you more effective at doing it.
One such framework is "Consensus Decision Making," which aims to incorporate cooperation into the decision-making process. The ability to discuss, disagree, and decide is fundamental to any organization's effectiveness.
Of course, this is not my original idea, but I've yet to find a succinct guide with the right level of informality that makes it approachable. This should be easy to implement and simply enough to explain to strangers in 3 minutes. So, here's my version.
Prerequisites
The group must share a common goal. They may disagree on the path, but the goal is shared and the best intentions must be assumed of everyone.
The group’s input must be genuinely desired. Have you every been asked for input on a decision that has already been made? What a waste of time. Appeal to consensus when and where consensus is truly needed or desired. Most decisions can be made by a group — this creates ownership and buy in — but if a decision should be decided by a decider, don’t belabor the process.
Prepare to disagree. This is the space to air your disagreements. When you walk out of the room or close the Zoom call, the group will have made a commitment — The time for objections will have passed. There will be no I told-you-so’s or revisionist renouncements. (Of course, new information might present itself later…and then you’ll be presented with a new decision to make.)
Someone needs to facilitate. One person in the group (maybe you, if you’re reading this) will lead the room through the following steps, soliciting participation from everyone and restating outcomes for clarity.
These rules of engagement honor the process and make it possible. Okay then, with that out of the way, the process can be pretty simple:
Step 1: Reframe the decision to be made as a proposal statement.
Let’s assume there’s been some healthy discussion. Information has been offered, challenged, remade, etc, etc. Facts and opinions have been exchanged. But, it’s time to snap a line. A decision needs to be made.
What may have started as a question or many questions should now be reframed as a single statement. Multiple choices are sorted, with one choice at the top. The appointed facilitator of this decision process should reframe the decision as a proposal statement that can be answered by everyone in Step 2.
Step 2: Poll for consensus.
Presented with the statement, each participant is required to give one of three possible responses. Everyone must participate.
I agree.
I agree, with reservations
I disagree
Some models expand the possibilities to 5, allowing for greater nuance in disagreement. I like to keep it simple, especially when introducing this method on-the-fly to a new group of participants. There is opportunity to handle nuance in step 3.
Step 3: Process the outcome.
Let’s digest the meaning and response to each of these positions.
Agreement with no reservations or hesitations! No further explanation needed.
Agreement with some reservation, though not enough to disagree or block the decision. This is not an “abstain” or pure neutral vote. This participant — by sharing their concerns — owns their position and is committing to trust the wisdom of the group. The group may volunteer to modify the proposal to address raised concerns, or may not.
Disagreement. This is where the magic happens! This participant knows where they stand and they cannot support the proposal as it has been presented.
If all votes are for 1 or 2, then congrats! The work is done and decision made. But, if we have any votes for #3, then there is a bit more work to do.
Healthy disagreement.
By participating in this consensus process, anyone who votes #3 has agreed to a critical additional step:
Offer a modification to the proposal that, if accepted by the group, would enable you to change your vote to at least #2. (In other words, tell us what we need to do to win your agreement.)
This modification is critical. It eliminates fruitless dissent I-don’t-know-what-I-want-I-just-don’t-like-your-idea energy. This requires an exchange of reason.
The group is now presented with the choice to accept or reject the modification. The facilitiator restates the modified proposal and poll the room again for new votes.
Ideally, the group finds agreement within a few of these modification “loops”. The modified proposal is often better than its initial form, especially if the group understands the nature of win-win agreements and the dangers of compromise.
If the modified proposal cannot be accepted — having heard all proposals, counter-proposals and ensuing discussion — the facilitator (or ultimate decider, if not the same person) may make a new choice:
Ask remaining dissenters (#3 Voters) to change their vote to a new (previously unavailable) #4 option: I disagree, but I will not block this decision and I will trust the wisdom of the group.
Suspend the process and delay the decision — Assign tasks to gather more information or explore issues raised in the discussion.
Make an executive decision — This has its risks, but may be the right thing to do, having formally solicited and received group input.
In my model, this 4th option is not immediately available. I want dissenters to offer modified proposals. But at the end of the day, we may have to “agree to disagree” and do so with the commitment to unity once the decision is made. There will be no “I told you so’s”.
And that’s it! Easy to read, hard to do. But, if you find yourself in the position of facilitating or participating in a group decision, I hope this technique may help you.