Cohousing-L Mailing List: RE: Beyond consensus

[Rob Sandelin (Exchange) (Robsan]

There are times when consensus is not a very good decision making=20
structure. For example, my experience is that things like color choices 

have no "right" or "best" answer, and so spending lots of group time=20
trying to reach consensus on the color of the commonhouse bathroom tile 

might not be a good use of everyones time. =20

In these cases, and others, what we do is use the decision board. We=20
post that a decision is going to be made by a group at a specific time. 

Whomever shows up to that meeting owns the decision.  This allows those 

interested in details of a given issue to be the drivers and spares=20
those who do not care having to sit through long discussions at large=20
group meetings.  If you find a large group discussion where four people 

are doing all the discussing, then that topic might be a good candidate 

to punt to a small group. =20

We also have used polling boards (voting) where a set of choices=20
(colors of trim for example) are placed out and people choose their=20
first and second choices. The "votes" are tallied and which ever gets=20
the most votes is the choice.

There are specific situations we have defined where we use whole group=20
consensus, and other situations which small groups own. For example,=20
any issue which would change the use of a common area is subject to=20
whole group consensus. For example, to turn a playground into a parking 

lot would require the whole group to consent. To change the color of=20
the swing set would not, and a small group would decide that.  Another=20
area that requires large group consensus is anything which directly=20
effects the property of a member.  If we decided to raise chickens and=20
we wanted to do it in my backyard, the whole group, including me, would 

have to consent. However the design and building of the chicken coop=20
would be a small group decision, as long as the funds were budgeted in=20
the common budget.=20

At Sharingwood we try to limit large group consensus to things where it 

is appropriate for the whole group to be invovled, and let the small=20
things go to  small groups or individuals.  If the entire group tried=20
to come to consensus on every detial of every decision, we would get=20
very little done and hold way too many meetings.=20

I would reccomend this system in principle to any group over 15 adults. 

If you are spending hours and hours wrestling decisions that only 3-4=20
people care about, then you are not using your large group time very=20
effectively.

Rob Sandelin
Sharingwood Cohousing