WorkLifeBridge

There are lots of ways to make decisions within an organization.

Some managers prefer to make decisions unilaterally, based on their own thinking and knowledge, and to dictate the results of those decisions to those working for them. Others like to make no decisions at all, delegating all decisions to others in their place. Some gather lots of information from everyone on their team and take the advice of their team in making their decisions. Others still try to get everyone to agree, valuing the buy-in and ownership that comes from consensus decision-making.

Some companies and organizations purport to value consensus decision-making so highly that they make it a core value and develop a culture of consensus that pervades the company. The resultant organization strives for harmony and involvement, making sure that everyone who wants to has a say in every decision and and that no one feels like decisions have been imposed upon them or dictated to them. By making sure that everyone in the organization is on board with every decision, these organizations strive for maximum buy-in from all involved, wholehearted implementation of the decisions, and reduced conflict in the organization.

The problem is that consensus might not always be the best way to make decisions, and that consensus decision-making can have drawbacks and pathologies that undermine the very purposes it looks to achieve. For one, not every decision concerns every person in the organization. In some cases, some people may have neither information relating to the matter at hand nor will be particularly affected by the results of any decision made. Requiring consensus draws these people into the decision-making process needlessly while potentially taking them away from areas where their skills are put to better use. In addition, consensus tends to be a slow process, and some decisions need to be made quickly.

Moreover, a culture of consensus can in reality be a mask for organizational ills such as rampant conflict avoidance or an inability to commit to decisions. Many people are uncomfortable with conflict and look to either avoid conversations that lead to conflict or to suppress conflict if it ever erupts. On an organizational scale, conflict avoidance can prevent people from having genuine discussions regarding their disagreements and diminish the richness of ideas that comes from heated debate. In addition, an unease around making decisions and commitments can lead to endless analysis and conversation in which nothing gets done. As a result, instead of consensus leading to good decisions and buy-in, it might lead to sub-optimal decisions, paralysis, and alienation.

Consensus decision-making can be wonderful, so long as you’ve chosen to use it purposefully and for valid reasons, and so long as you are using it under the right circumstances and with the involvement of the right people. It is also a difficult process to manage and must be tended to skillfully and diligently in order to be effective at achieving the results you want.

Here are some resources and ideas to help you get the most out of your consensus decision-making process:

• Here are some step-by-step instructions for achieving consensus
• For a more detailed treatment, here is a handbook on consensus processes
• For an even more elaborate discussion, here are notes on consensus
• Finally, here is a Cornell University study on when managers should and shouldn’t use consensus