Consensus Decision Making
Decisions reach a consensus when a majority actively support a proposal, and there are no active disagreements. Proposals actively supported by a minority while the majority is neutral about it is not considered a consensus.
While a regimented organization that answers to the will of a single strongman might be a pretty horrible place to be in, a mob that forces conformity under threat of violence might be as equally hellish. According to the critics of democracy, democracy is simply a more civilized form of mob rule, one that forces participants to submit their personal agency to the will of the crowd. Making decisions by consensus is a response to that.
Consensus requires trust.
Presented as a way of non-coercive collective-decisionmaking, consensus assumes that all parties in the discussion are participating in good-faith and in the pursuit of their common goals. This may sound restrictive because it requires so much, especially in large groupings. That is why consensus decisionmaking assumes trust between all participants. Trust doesn’t scale beyond Dunbar’s Number without modifications to the human mind, and that’s alright.
Keep your groups small and tight-knit. As in the example below, consensus is an involved process. It’s easier to find consensus with people you already know and trust.
Decisions are not binary in consensus
One constant criticism of democracy is how people are forced to either fully support something or not. There is no difference between not actively supporting something and simply voting just to get things over with. Especially in cases involving vulnerable minorities, a binary yes/no decision usually embeds the biases of the majority against them at an organizational level.
One could express their stance by:
Actively Supporting the proposal, usually denoted by maybe a raised left fist.
Consenting to the proposal (passive support), usually denoted by a thumbs-up
Have concerns about the proposal, usually with a raised hand
Neutral towards the proposal, no response or a hand on their chest.
Rejecting the proposal with an outward-facing palm as if blocking someone from passing by.
Of course the above aren’t the only possibilities and the hand-gestures (if any) can differ from group to group.
An example consensus process
The gathering
The group decides that something requires collective approval before something is pursued or action is taken.
Proposal
Information about the decision is laid out to the group.
Deliberation
Concerns about and rejections of the proposal are raised by other members.
Revision (if needed)
The proposal is revised as needed based on feedback. Repeat steps 2 and 3 as necessary until consensus is found.
Random Links
-
… I pull out “we don’t do that here.” It is a conversation ender. If you are the newcomer and someone who has been around a long time says “we don’t do that here”, it is hard to argue. This sentence doesn’t push my morality on anyone. If they want to do whatever it is elsewhere, I’m not telling them not to. I’m just cluing them into the local culture and values. If I deliver this sentence well it carries no more emotional weight than saying, “in Japan, people drive on the left.” “We don’t do that here” should be a statement of fact and nothing more. It clearly and concisely sets a boundary, and also makes it easy to disengage with any possible rebuttals.