💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anonymous-introduction-to-consensus-descision-making.gm… captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:09:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Introduction to Consensus Descision-Making Author: Anonymous Language: en Topics: consensus Source: Retrieved on December 17, 2009 from http://www.spunk.org/library/consensu/sp000761.txt
This was developed by the Quakers originally, but similar principles
have been used since pre-history.
“Their natural way of doing it [reaching a decision] is to discuss it at
length, ... until public opinion has settled overwhelmingly in one
direction”
Obviously, this doesn’t work so well with large groups. But as I pointed
out earlier, large groups tend to fragment.
Consensus is not the same as voting. Nor does it mean unanimity. Groups
sometimes think they are using consensus but revert to voting when they
can’t all agree.
When we vote, we are still using dualism — here is one choice, or
another. The choice we will make is the one of the majority. Thus the
majority wields power over the minority.
The ethics of integrity however, give no-one the right to wield power
over another. With consensus, the story is different.
Consensus is based on the principle that every voice is worth hearing,
every concern is justified. If a proposal makes a few people, even one
person, deeply unhappy — then there is a valid reason for that
unhappiness, and if we ignore it, we are likely to make a mistake.
Instead of spending energy trying to convert people to agree to
something they don’t want, we drop either or both alternatives and look
for a new solution, one that satisfies everyones concerns. The universe
is not either/or choices, it is “rich with infinite possibilities”
The consensus usually works with a facilitator, who is agreed by the
group at the start of the meeting.
One person puts forward a proposal. The facilitator makes sure everyone
gets a chance to put forward concerns, or speak for it. Negative
reactions are not expressed as hard/fast positions. Instead of saying “I
am categorically against it”, you say “I am concerned about it,
because...” Voicing concerns allows the proposal to be modified to meet
those proposals.
If a person feels their concerns cannot be met, and the group is
enthusiastic, they can “stand aside”, and simply not participate in that
part of the group.
If they have strong objections to a proposal that affects them, they can
block the proposal. Blocks are used rarely and carefully. But the block
gives each individual ultimate power to influence decisions that affect
her/him. If someone feels strongly enough about something to block it,
they are probably aware of factors the group should consider more
carefully.
Consensus takes time. Its also fails to work well in large groups,
simply because there isn’t time to hear everyone. It also can’t deal
with dualist questions imposed from outside the community.
The facilitator observes the content of talk in a meeting. They keep the
meeting focused and moving. Commonly people will drift off the subject
under discussion and begin talking about something else. The facilitator
reminds them what the subject is, and if necessary arranges for later
discussion of new issues raised.
From time to time the facilitator may summarize what has been said so
far, and what has been decided as relevant.
The facilitator calls on people to speak. It is their job to ensure that
everyone has the chance to state their concerns.
The facilitator should be neutral on the subject being discussed. If
they hold strong views, another facilitator can be chosen for that
topic.
The timekeepers job, when time is limited, is to ensure that people
remain aware of how much time is passing discussing each item.
Peacekeepers function not only during meetings, but whenever the group
is active. Their role is to keep order and prevent crises. They defuse
potential violence from outside the group or within it.
The notestaker takes notes and ensures that they are presented to the
group for checking. “This should be the person who monopolizes the
conversation most”
Coordinators act as a switchboard — they keep track of what is being
done, who is doing it and what needs to be done. “It is a marvelous
opportunity to make mistakes and learn to take criticism.” Coordinators
should switch roles often.