In this guide, you`ll find a lot of information to help you make decisions by consensus, including why you might use it, basic principles and process, how to apply it to larger groups of people, and ideas for dealing with common problems. We also have a short guide to consensus, and our meeting moderation guide includes plenty of tips on how to make sure your consensus meetings run smoothly. By definition, no decision is taken by consensus against the will of an individual or a minority. If significant concerns remain unresolved, a proposal may be blocked and prevented from moving forward. This means that the entire group must work hard to find solutions that address everyone`s concerns, rather than ignoring or refuting minority views. It is important that everyone has a common understanding of the process used by the meeting. There are many variations of the consensus process, so even if people have experience in using consensus, they may use it differently than you! Group chords or manual signals can also be used, which needs to be explained. Another method of promoting the deal is to use a voting process where all members of the group have a strategic incentive to accept rather than block. [34] However, it is very difficult to see the difference between those who support the decision and those who only tolerate it tactically for incitement. Once they have received this incentive, they can undermine or reject the implementation of the agreement in various non-obvious ways. In general, electoral systems avoid offering incentives (or “bribes”) to change a sincere vote.

In his book on Wikipedia, Joseph Reagle examines the merits and challenges of consensus in open and online communities. [38] Randy Schutt,[39] Starhawk,[40] and other direct action practitioners focus on the dangers of an apparent agreement, followed by actions in which group divisions become dangerously apparent. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of 1569-1795 used consensual decisions in its Sejms (legislative assemblies) in the form of liberum veto. A kind of unanimous approval, the Liberum Veto originally allowed any member of a Diet to veto a single law using Sisto activitatem! (Latin: “I stop the activity!”) or Nie pozwalam! (Polish: “I don`t allow!”). [71] Over time, it developed into a much more extreme form, in which any member of the Diet could unilaterally and immediately force the end of the current session and repeal all previously passed laws of that session. [72] Due to the excessive use and deliberate sabotage by neighboring powers bribing members of the Diet, legislation became very difficult and weakened the Commonwealth. Shortly after the Commonwealth banned the Liberum Veto as part of its Constitution of 3 May 1791, it dissolved under pressure from neighbouring powers. [73] “Community members first seek unanimous consensus.

However, if one or more people block the proposal, the blockers hold a series of solution-oriented meetings with one or two proponents to create a new proposal that addresses the same issues as the original proposal. The new proposal is submitted to the next meeting, where it is likely to be adopted. If no new proposal is created, the original proposal will be submitted to the next meeting with a super-majority of 75% and will probably be adopted. In 25 years at N Street Cohousing, this process has only happened twice, with two solution-focused meetings each. Excerpt from Busting the Myth that Consensus-with-einstimmig is good for communities, 2012 The term consensus of opinion, which is actually not redundant (see Sinn 1a; the meaning that adopts the phrase is slightly older), has been so often referred to as redundancy that many authors avoid it. You`re sure to use consensus alone when it`s clear that you mean consensus of opinion, and most authors actually do. Making good consensual decisions can take longer than voting, especially if a group is new. It may take some time for ideas to be discussed, for all objections to be resolved, and some decisions may take more than one session. The advantage of consensus is that decisions usually have a higher standard. Consensus becomes faster with practice, especially in a long-term group. Radical Routes is a British self-help network with around 40 member cooperatives. Decisions are made by consensus using a delegated assembly structure.

The network meets four times a year at business meetings to make various decisions, including the review of member unions` proposals for the Radical Routes loan fund. Since consensus decision-making is focused on discussion and gathers feedback from all stakeholders, this can be time-consuming. This is a potential liability in situations where decisions need to be made quickly or where it is not possible to obtain the opinion of all delegates within a reasonable period of time. In addition, the time required to participate in the decision-making process by consensus can sometimes be a barrier to the participation of those who are unable or unwilling to make the commitment. [50] However, once a decision has been made, it can be reacted to more quickly than to a decision made […].