Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: RE: [C-L]_Consensus vs Majority Voting

[Robert P. Arjet (rarjet]

Rob writes that: 
>
>In a healthy consensus process, I have watched functional groups....make 5-6
>consensus decisions in one 3 hour meeting [because] They understand consensus,
>all the members
>are trained in it as a requirement to participate, they have outstanding
>facilitation, and communication is a priority.

but on the other hand, he finds that:

>Most cohousing groups don't have a process for dealing with process
>problems, few ever intervene with inapproiate or damaging behaviors of
>individuals, and seldom do groups formally train themselves in  good process
>and expect all new members to take the same training. So in most cohousing
>groups, consensus really means cave into the dominant personalities demands
>or spend weeks going around and around.
>
Why is this the case?  Although I really favor the idea of consensus with no
voting backup, I'd certainly rather vote than be in a group like the one Rob
describes above.  Is it really true that most groups never go through formal
training?   

I tend to be a strong advocate of consensus with no voting (I admit that as a
Quaker, I'm biased), but I think trying to do it without training is like
trying to design the commonhouse without an architect, and hoping it will
succeed with no one willing to intervene is like hoping that common meals will
happen with no one willing to cook.   None of us are born knowing how to make
decisions by consensus, and we certainly aren't trained in school or in the
average workplace.

If cohousing groups are really failing (or flailing) at consensus the way Rob
describes above, then it would seem to be one of the more pressing problems
facing cohousing. 

my $.02

Robert Arjet
Central Austin Cohousing
http://www.austincohousing.org

_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l