Conflict Resolution | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: mbishop (mbishopasf.com) | |
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 14:32:27 -0600 |
It seems to me:? >From a pragmatic point of view, a consensus process may be just a tool. >From an idealistic point of view, a consensus process is an aspiration driven by the same idealistic aspiration that lead people (like me) to living in a cohousing community. Aren?t most cohousing groups aspiring to consensus? Why? Concerning trust: It seems to me that a group of untrusting strangers making decisions about their community will have problems no matter what process they use. I am not clear on how consensus is more vulnerable to the lack of trust than a majority vote. Anyone able to explain this to me? Does consensus require more trust than a majority vote? <<? This is commonly expressed where a small group makes a decision, brings it to the larger group, and the larger group shoots it down with What ifs?.>> For a majority vote, would not the same larger group vote against proposals from the untrusted smaller group? <<Many people who join communities may not have the skills in communication, self awareness and process that it takes to effectively use consensus. And most have no training in how to be collaborative. Most Americans are deeply ingrained in competitive behaviors, which undermine consensus. And, most groups that take on consensus do not have very good facilitators, and this really causes problems.>> Yes. It seems that those going with consensus need to have in place a plan for building skills in facilitation, communication and in the understanding of intent of the consensus process which ties back to the vision/mission of the group. In fact, it seems to me, that training should be a requirement for membership. I may not be speaking for many people when I say that I am not interested in living in a cohousing community that are not skilled in communications and working together collaboratively. I?m not interested in living with people that use competitive behavior patterns in making decisions in my community. This is one of the weakness of consensus with cohousing catching on. It goes against the norm. I think that if the society taught communications skills as a requirement in schools and used consensus as a norm, I probably would not need to be making so much effort in creating a better community/society/world for myself. The majority vote system in our society demands skills but not the same demand as the skills of consensus. People skilled in getting votes do well in a majority vote system. <<?. The person who threatens, "If I don't get my way I'll block everybody and hold up the whole group" is sometimes not unlike the kid that threatens to hold her breath until she turns blue.... Its counterproductive, making people question the group and its ability to accomplish anything. ? ? The key measure for blocking, in my experience, really should be "This is bad for the group because....." Not "I don't like this". >> Yes. Having blocked consensus for the right reasons is good and for the wrong reasons, terrible. Having a vote on the legitimacy of the intent of a blocked consensus seems to remedy this (in theory, I have not experienced this.) <<?. consensus works best when there is a definite best answer. In the case of the tile, blue or green is a matter of preference, there is no best answer... ? So in this case, a weighted prioritization would be a much more effective tool for making a decision. The details of multifaceted design decisions do not work well as consensus decisions. In this situation, it might be a lot more effective to reach consensus on design goals and leave the details to other methods.>> I think that a weighted prioritzation method can be done with consensus. However, you raise an interesting problem I have not thought about. So how does this work? A group is meeting to decide on the color of the tile. Is it already understood by the group which method to use based on the attributes of the proposal? How? Should the decision methods and when to use them be put in the groups bylaws or policies for making decisions? Our group is starting to use a thumbs-up, thumbs-sideways, thumbs-down for coming to consensus quickly on little things. We talk about the proposal, then check the thumbs. It is interesting to see the thumb movements as everyone watches everyone elses thumbs (and faces). Kind of an instant feedback mechanism. <<?In fact, allowing individuals or small groups to make decisions with autonomy is often the most effective means of moving the group forward and encourages iniative, leadership and ownership?.>> Yes. It seems that a group can delegate by consensus. It seems that it is almost required to have committees and subcommttees with powers of decision as the group gets larger or the proposals get complex. Excuse me if I sound argumentative. My comments may sound strong and passionate. Actually, I?m too new at this to be that way. I'm just trying these views on for size? like a suit. How do they look? Mark Bishop Acorn Creek Community
- Re: Conflict Resolution, (continued)
- Re: Conflict Resolution Unnat, December 3 1998
- Conflict Resolution mbishop, December 4 1998
- Re: Conflict Resolution Kevin Wolf, December 4 1998
- Re: Conflict Resolution Stevenson/Bitner, December 5 1998
- Conflict Resolution mbishop, December 7 1998
- Re: Conflict Resolution James Nordgaard, December 10 1998
- Conflict Resolution Mark & Kathy Bishop, December 10 1998
- Re: Conflict Resolution James Nordgaard, December 16 1998
- Re: Conflict Resolution Becky Schaller, December 17 1998
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.