Re: Process cards--decision point | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Tree Bressen (tree![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 19:00:08 -0700 (MST) |
Hi, > 4. Consider having separate signals for "voting" versus discussion. In >our group the color cards are only to facilitate discussion but thumbs up, >sideways or down for voting. I hope no one will take offense at me saying this, but i wince whenever i hear someone in a consensus group refer to "voting" in this way. As Ann Z. points out writing in response to the voting backups thread now also in progress on this list, consensus arises from a whole different paradigm than voting, one that relies on our ability to synthesize solutions from the wisdom of the group. I think it's useful and important to maintain the integrity of both voting and consensus processes by keeping them distinct and expressing clearly when you are using each one. When it comes to the decision point in the consensus process, i strongly recommend that groups use language such as "calling for consensus" or "checking for any unresolved concerns." As a consensus facilitator, the word "vote" does not cross my lips unless it's in reference to formal voting fallbacks or some other mechanism that the group has deliberately decided to use to supplement or replace the consensus process. Personally i also avoid use of the thumbs-up/down/sideways method, out of concern that even that might foster too much of a voting atmosphere. Rather, i ask for unresolved concerns (or stand-asides or blocks), and/or i ask if there's consensus and look for a smile, nod, thumbs-up, or some other overt acknowledgement from each person, during a careful scan of the circle. Because in the U.S. we grow up with so much exposure to majority vote process and so little exposure to genuine consensus process, it's really easy to fall into a voting mentality. I think using different language is part of changing our culture around that. Peace, --Tree ----------------------------------------------- Tree Bressen 1680 Walnut St. Eugene, OR 97403 (541) 484-1156 tree [at] ic.org _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l
-
Process cards Maggi Rohde, April 1 2002
- Re: Process cards Catya Belfer-Shevett, April 1 2002
-
Re: Process cards Jeanne Goodman, April 1 2002
- Re: Process cards Catya Belfer-Shevett, April 1 2002
- Re: Process cards--decision point Tree Bressen, April 1 2002
- RE: Process cards--decision point is not voting Rowenahc, April 2 2002
- Re: Process cards--decision point Doug Simons, April 2 2002
- RE: Process cards--decision point Rob Sandelin, April 3 2002
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.