|Re: RE: process and the spirit of consensus||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Berrins (Berrinsaol.com)|
|Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 06:45:07 -0600 (MDT)|
In a message dated 4/22/02 7:41:39 PM, sharon [at] sharonvillines.com writes: << If you follow a good process, then you'll have opportunity for questioning > the outcome built in. And if the outcome is good, the process was also. > The means and the ends are inseparable except in abtraction and theory. Actually this is the presumption that I was questioning. When you get to the end of a process and the decision is not a good one, it is not appropriate to say, "but we followed the process we agreed upon." >> A good example of good process/bad outcome is what all of us on the list know- computers and software. You know, garbage in, garbage out. The program did what it was supposed to but the answer was off. Process works the same way. You need to know your goal to pick the right process and then you need to give it the correct information in the appropriate form. In cohousing, adding concensus to the program means that everyone needs to have the opportunity to give their input while also allowing the program to run. The stinky points come with conflict; the right process and good facilitators help to minimize conflict. I think that's about as far as I can (or want to) stretch this analogy... Roger Berman Pathways Cohousing Northampton, MA _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.