RE: Consensus and ideology | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Rob Sandelin (floriferous![]() |
|
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 00:50:01 -0700 (MST) |
Values drive many decisions and also drive people out of group decision making. The balance is to discern group values from individual values and then using communication patterns that enable empathy to allow values to be understood. Sometimes the biggest unasked question is simply WHY? Why do you care so much about this, why is this so important to you? Understanding the why may give you an angle which you can find a compromise with. But I will say this again, groups with wide values diversity will have very hard times using consensus effectively. And if you don't have really excellent quality facilitation in these situations, you can find your meetings devolving into bad feelings towards the process and towards each other. People bring their values with them to every meeting, and those values are expressed regularly. Learn to listen for value statements and ask for values clarification. Also, it is almost always worth the time to clarify your stated group values, even if everybody is on the same page with them. It is not uncommon that individuals want the rest of the community to hold their values, and they seek in the mission statement the reflection of that, and are disappointed when it is not true. Cohousing ideology is hidden. For example, how many political conservatives are in your group? As far as I know, their are no cohousing groups that are made up of political conservatives. There are a few sprinkled here and there, but in all my touring, I have yet to find any groups not dominated by liberal, left of center politics. This is not an accident. Living cooperatively is a extremely liberal lifestyle and brings with it a set of values from the start. If you advertised cohousing development looking at some of the hidden expectations the ad might read something like this: Looking for liberal, upper middle-class homeowners, with many thousands of dollars of liquid cash, who have a huge tolerance for meetings, and are willing to give up much of the control over aspects of their life to a group. Must be risk takers, and have a willingness to be highly social. A high degree of patience and tolerance is desirable. To apply, you must place tens of thousands of dollars in a risky real estate venture largely controlled by amateurs with no experience. Now who in the world would sign up on a project like that? So we soft pedal all the risk, capital requirements, and meeting tolerances with vision. And it is the vision of living cooperatively that sells members. Sometimes, in the darkness of unresolved differences, it can be very helpful to go back and touch that vision, to remind yourself what the heck you are doing this for in the first place. Rob Sandelin Community Works! _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l
- Re: Defining for the good of the community, (continued)
- Re: Defining for the good of the community Sharon Villines, December 25 2001
-
Re: Consensus and ideology Racheli&John, December 22 2001
-
Re: Consensus and ideology Sharon Villines, December 22 2001
- Re: Consensus and ideology Robyn Williams, December 23 2001
- RE: Consensus and ideology Rob Sandelin, December 24 2001
- Definitions of Cohousing Sharon Villines, December 25 2001
-
Re: Consensus and ideology Sharon Villines, December 22 2001
- Re: Consensus and ideology Sharon Villines, December 24 2001
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.