I read this morning some postings about decision-making which make reference
to consensus. Rol stated "Avoid consensus decision-making". He then proceeds
in the next sentence to describe consensus decision-making. Perhaps I am
missing a piece of this conversation.
At my company I am facilitating monthly, three-day classes for employees on
High Performance Teams. In the module about decision making, I stress the
need for consensus decisions.
If we use this term, let's agree on the kinds of definitions. I'll offer
mine.
In the trusty dictionary (Webster's Ninth symphony), I read "1 : group
solidarity in sentiment and belief ". In the participant's manual, my
students read this on page 3:
o Consensus is reached when wll members can say they either agree with the
decision, or at least they can live with it having "had their say," and
feeling that they've been heard.
o Consensus does not mean that there is 100% agreement that a given solution
is the absolute best decision, but it does mean that everyone can agree to the
benefits of the solution and its viability.
o Consensus means that no one on the team feels ethically or professionally
violated by the decision, and everyone agrees to support it.
o Consensus means no winners and losers, only winners.
Consensus comes down to two thoughts: as Andrew Grove of Intel believes, we
have to agree to disagree; or, to put it another way, we disagree and commit.
This company location where I work comprises 700+ employees. Monthly we hold
the 3-day team course. At this point in our TQ development, about 150
employees have CHOSEN to attend the course. Results are demonstrable in the
company already as we move toward what I would call a critical mass of
knowledge and involvement. Consensus as defined herein has played a
significant role.
Best regards,
-- Barry Mallis bmallis@markem.comTotal Quality Resource Manager MARKEM Corporation Keene, New Hampshire
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>