Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re; Decision making questions

[Rich Lobdill (richardl]

..
>Robsan asks:
>
>>I am doing some update work on the CRG (Cohousing Resource Guide) and
>>would like your feedback on the following questions:
>>1. Do you make decisions by consensus, by voting or both?
>
>>2. How do you make decisions quickly?
>
>>3. What process or techniques do you use for making decisions that works
>well and that you would like to pass on to others?
>
>We at Grell Coho feel we use the consensus process although I know there has 
>
>been much debate as to how pure any consensus process actually is. We have
>yet to take a 'vote' although we have had a few times where members have
>given the group their gift of standing aside.
>
>My observation is that we make decisions the quickest when members follow a
>certain pattern. First, before a presentation is given on the subject at
>hand, a well thought out and succinct proposal is put forth and consensus is 
>
>asked for. I'm surprised at the number of times this has simply short
>circuited the whole process and we reach consensus right there (our response 
>
>to a proposal is either thumbs up for 'I agree', thumb sideways 'I need
>clarification or I disagree' and thumb down 'I strongly disagree at this
>time'). This fast track usually occurs when a subject has been discussed
>before or when the presenter is under the mistaken impression that the group 
>
>thinks this is a big issue only to find that the decision time has come and
>we have bigger fish to fry. Putting the proposal first presents a clear
>understanding of what is being asked for and tends to flush out hidden
>agenda.
>
>However the usual case is that more than one person has  a sideways thumb.
>The presenter does not take questions at that time but commences to give
>their report on the subject. At least two things are important here 1) that
>the presenters report is thought through and is reasonably clear to members
>who may have different levels of understanding of the issue. The proposal is 
>
>doomed if it covers too many issues or new concepts. 2) the presenter is
>well served by striving to be even handed with all sides of the issue. Our
>group senses railroading and will resist even if the proposal is the right
>one.
>
>After the report is finished thumbs are requested again then questions are
>taken. If it seems everyone has questions we do a more structured 'circle
>check' where the presenter or the facilitator distils the major issue and we 
>
>all take turns (succinctly again!) to offer our views. The proposal is
>revisited and/or revised and consensus is attempted again. If no consensus
>is reached after this complete process then it usually becomes clear that
>the issue is bigger than this one meeting and we need to revisit it at
>another time and possibly after some more research. A group rhythm has
>evolved for this point in the process and that is that if there are one or
>two people who are blocking consensus then they are looked upon with the
>expectation that they will put some effort into an alternative solution.
>
>The last technique which I'd like to illuminate is one discovered by
>accident. I have found that if you are bringing an issue to the group and
>you're reasonably sure that its going to be a surprise (in our case it is
>typically the need to spend more money), it has helped to put that issue at
>both ends of the meeting agenda. At the beginning of the meeting you state
>your proposal and do the presentation. If you don't get a quick consensus
>you stop there and then save time at the end of the meeting to revisit the
>proposal. I believe this has helped us more than once to come to consensus
>on an issue which would have otherwise been continued until the next week.
>Why does this work? As above, our group reacts negatively to the feeling of
>being pushed towards a decision. One of our strengths and weaknesses is that 
>
>we are a bunch of individuals who have made it to where we are in life by
>following our own path  and continually struggle with melding into a
>singular group mind (the dichotomy of the cohousing struggle?). It seems
>that if you can just give the members a short amount of time try on this
>proposal without the pressure of consensing then they oft times will be able 
>
>to put the proposal in perspective and realize that it is reasonable and
>they too can own this decision. If this individual processing time can be
>done during the middle of the meeting then the group has saved a whole week
>in the decision process.
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Rich Lobdill
>Grell Cohousing
>Oceano, CA
>
>
Rich Lobdill
Grell CoHousing Group
Oceano, CA