Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Consensus decision making

[Racheli Gai (racheli]

My impression is that at least some of this discussion is based on what 
I perceive as
misunderstanding of what "consensus" means.

To use Craig's cereal example below: For a person to say that they'll 
block the buying
of community cereal because they don't personally eat cereal is an 
abuse of the
consensus process.  Blocking can't be simply a matter of one's personal 
preference.
If the kind of "consensus" practiced by groups is of the kind which 
allows blocking
based on personal preference, then no wonder it doesn't work!

At Sonora Cohousing, Tucson, we used to have people block based
on personal preferences.  After a workshop with CT Butler we worked on 
seriously tightening
what we consider valid requirements for blocking. We also defined more 
closely our
process of working on issues.  It has not solved all of our problems, 
but it certainly
helped.

Racheli.



On Aug 5, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Craig Ragland wrote:

> My opinions - not "official Coho/US doctrine" - not much of which 
> actually
> exists.
>
> Groups that do decide to delegate will learn what effective means to 
> them -
> probably through trial-and-error as they live with delegation across
> (hopefully) a great many years. I suspect it is mostly about whether 
> the
> small group decisions work for most of the people most of the time - 
> and not
> speed of decisions, although speed is sometimes highly valued too. 
> Working
> for most of the people most of the time is, I think, a "lower" 
> standard than
> expecting each decision to be embraced by the whole community. 
> Communities
> can decide to empower sub-groups and not require overall group 
> consensus on
> some/all of the smaller group's decisions. The whole community can 
> choose to
> embrace that smaller groups do make lots of decisions - serving the
> community as best they can.
>
> A great many decisions are made at Songaia without attempts to reach 
> overall
> consensus of the community - and sometimes these smaller group 
> decisions are
> questioned by others, and then require more work prior to 
> implementation.
> For example, a small group, the Fabulous Food Folks decides on waht 
> specific
> food items are in our common pantry... and lots of people living here 
> simply
> don't like (or want) some of our food items for their personal use.
>
> I do not currently eat cereals or granola. If I was asked to agree to 
> buy
> each type of cereal - and decided to put my personal needs/wants about 
> "my
> food" above the community - I'd simply say "No." If everybody did 
> that, our
> food pantry would be much smaller, some type of lowest common 
> denominator -
> and our overall program would be impoverished rather than abundant. To 
> seek
> consensus on each individual food item we stock would just be silly. 
> As a
> result, we usually empower the Fabulous Food Folk to do their best to
> balance our various individual preferences, needs, and values... so we 
> do
> buy four cereal foods.
>
> I'd urge folks to question the sacred cow of:
>
> "consensus all the time = good"
>
> When the cow doesn't respond with a "moo," you might focus more on what
> works and what feels good for most of the people most of the time.
>
> In community, Craig
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 7:29 AM, Racheli Gai 
> <racheli [at] sonoracohousing.com>wrote:
>
> > It seems to me to be important to define what is meant by the term
> > "effective":
> > Is an effective community one which makes decision fast? Is it one 
> > where
> > decisions, once reached, are embraced by the whole community and
> > therefore
> > are carried out effectively, or? ...
> >
> > I think that a high level of trust is a precondition for high level of
> > delegation
> > (so that decision are seen as supporting the whole community, not this
> > or that
> > faction).  If this is missing, delegating becomes very problematic.
> >
> > Racheli (Sonora Cohousing, Tucson).
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Craig Ragland wrote:
> >
> > > Here Here Joani!
> > >
> > > My opinion is that more effective cohousing groups using consensus do
> > > delegate LOTS of decision-making - especially ones requiring detailed
> > > study
> > > and understanding. I believe a common misunderstanding about 
> > > consensus
> > > is
> > > that ALL decisions MUST involve EVERYBODY in decision-making process.
> > >
> > > When individuals and sub-groups are appropriately empowered, they
> > > increase
> > > their effectiveness as they create plans that are both (1) consistent
> > > with
> > > their mandate and (2) that truly serve the broader group - including
> > > those
> > > with minority views.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Joani Blank <joani [at] swansway.com> 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Friends,
> > > >
> > > > Here's part of an email exchange I had with Tim Mensch about his
> > > > recent post on this subject:
> > > >
> > > > A good agenda or steering committee will only put on the 
> > > > table/agenda
> > > > for general community meetings, items of some significance that
> > > > really need community buy-in to be effective.  In the example you
> > > > gave (leaky roof damaging some of the common property), a committee
> > > > (Maintenance, perhaps) can have blanket authorization in advance to
> > > > arrange a repair in such an emergency.
> > > >
> > > > Here at Swan's Market Cohousing (Oakland, CA), individuals and
> > > > committees are authorized (by consensus) to make decisions about all
> > > > manner of things after there has been an opportunity in the general
> > > > community meeting for a variety of views on the proposal to be
> > > > presented, and sometimes a straw vote to get the "sense of the
> > > > meeting."  This seems to work fine, giving everyone who has an
> > > > opinion, a chance to have their say on the matter (and to be
> > > > respectfully heard), and not tying the whole community up on matters
> > > > where it really doesn't matter if one or two people object, even
> > > > strongly object, to what will probably be the decision made by the
> > > > individual or committee that's been authorized to make that 
> > > > decision.
> > > >
> > > > Joani
> > > >
> > > > Joani Blank
> > > > land line : 510-834-7399 (preferred)
> > > > cell: 510-387-1315
> > > > Swan's Market Cohousing.
> > > >
> > > > P Save Trees ...please don't print this e-mail unless you really 
> > > > need
> > > > to.
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> > > > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Craig Ragland
> > >
> > > Coho/US executive director
> > > http://www.cohousing.org
> > > craig [at] cohousing.org
> > >
> > > Please try email first, include your phone number (w/time zone) - or
> > > give me
> > > a call: 425-487-3550 (Pacific)... communicate!
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> > > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
>
>
> --
> Craig Ragland
>
> Coho/US executive director
> http://www.cohousing.org
> craig [at] cohousing.org
>
> Please try email first, include your phone number (w/time zone) - or 
> give me
> a call: 425-487-3550 (Pacific)... communicate!
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/