Consensus and time pressure | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Becky Schaller (beckys![]() |
|
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:11:59 -0700 (MST) |
Part of the way I understand consensus is that the group tries to create a proposal that addresses the concerns and needs of all involved when making the final decision. There are ways of doing this which maximize the chance of this happening. We've adopted a 3 step process where you start by hearing the concerns and needs of people before creating a proposal. Theoretically, this sounds great but for various reasons, we often overlook this step. Sometimes we skip over this step because some people may think a particular proposal will address numerous community needs and it is simply difficult for any of us to think how we would star with this first step. Other times we skip over this first step because of time concerns. This tactic has been known to backfire on more than one occasion. What I've found is that sometimes when we skip over this first step, we then have trouble even thinking of how to incorporate everyone's needs and concerns. When we skip over this first step, the whole energy around the decision often changes. We're no longer looking to see how we might create a proposal which addresses everyone's concerns in the best way that we can. Instead we're looking at who is for the proposal and who is against it. There is a lot of pressure on people to at least agree on the proposal so that we can all move forward. Unfortunately, what happens is we skip over that time of creative problem solving which I believe is so essential to the consensus process. Understandably, people want to move on. So we hold up the cards, and most people are happy with the decision and a few people feel like they've been worn out and leave with perhaps a few emotional bruises. Who the unhappy people are changes from time to time and I actually think everyone is happy with most decisions. But as time progresses, more and more people have memories of feeling worn out and bruised for wanting the community to try to address some less popular concerns in the final proposal. Most decisions will probably not contribute to the destruction of the community. Therefore, it's really not legitimate to hold up a red card. However, as I see this process get repeated over the years, I think the process itself contributes little by little at least to the wearing away of community life and spirit. My question is, Do other communities experience a tension between those who want to follow the process and those who want to get decisions made quickly? If so, is it anything like what I have described in the above message? What did you do to address the issue? Becky Schaller Sonora Cohousing _________________________________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
-
Consensus and time pressure Becky Schaller, March 6 2004
- Re: Consensus and time pressure Sharon Villines, March 9 2004
-
Who Lives in Cohousing? Sharon Villines, March 9 2004
-
Re: Who Lives in Cohousing? Racheli Gai, March 9 2004
- Re: Who Lives in Cohousing? Sharon Villines, March 9 2004
-
Re: Who Lives in Cohousing? Racheli Gai, March 9 2004
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.