Emergent Consensus Based on Collaboration, Agreement, and Congeniality
At the end of a recent post entitled Pursuing Our Purpose Out of a Passion for Christ, I offered to share a process for developing consensus with a congregational leadership community around a draft of their strategic planning document. Such a process could also be applied to numerous other group decision-making processes. Soon after I suggested such a process I received an e-mail message from a colleague asking how I would define consensus. A lot of misunderstanding exists around the concept of consensus. So, let’s start there.
Consensus is the desired end result of a collaborative decision-making process that reaches agreement that is congenial, even inspiring, but not necessarily unanimous. It traditionally does not involve voting, except as a formal affirmation of what has already been decided--for the minutes, etc. This attempt at a definition of consensus immediately begs for the definition of words such as collaborative, agreement, and congenial.
Collaborative means a process that is mutual and shared among the participants in the decision-making process. It involves adequate time and opportunity to process the information needed to complete a decision that is positive, empowering, synergistic, and may represent a new level of discernment or understanding.
Agreement means harmony or consistency with a centered set of values that guide the organization or movement seeking to make spiritual, strategic decisions. While agreement implies unity, harmony means that different voices can sing in a beautiful manner that compliments one another, but not be singing the same notes.
Congenial means in a friendly or pleasant manner that exemplifies the gift of hospitality. It is the opposite of hostile. It is dialogical rather than a debate. It is respectful rather than adversarial. It implies the existence of a trust relationship.
Building consensus with a congregational leadership community around a significant spiritual and strategic decision involves proactive efforts at collaboration and agreement with a congenial spirit. Two tools that assist with building consensus are an Affirm and Build Feedback chart and an understanding of the Four Pathways to Yes.
Each of these tools assumes a positive approach to decision-making that celebrates what is right and good about a proposal rather than what is wrong and bad. Problem-solving will only help an organization correct what is wrong. It will not empower an organization to soar.
Question for Generative Dialogue: What transitions and changes would have to be made in the way your congregation, denomination, or other organization functions in order for consensus to become its primary means of decision-making, and what role can you play in that transformation beginning today?
Related and/or Future Posts: The Affirm and Build Feedback chart and the article entitled Four Pathways to Yes are available at http://bullardjournal.blogs.com/bullardjournal/spiritual_strategic_journeys/index.html.
BullardJournal Post 2004-002, Copyright 2004, Rev. George Bulllard, D.Min., http://bullardjournal.blogs.com/bullardjournal
Recent Comments