Re: Groupthink | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Norm Gauss (normangauss11![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:55:00 -0700 (PDT) |
Saoirse: > Rather, in my comm'ty, these [process] activities are designed to help transition > people from the hectic pace of their lives into a focus on what we are doing in THIS > place at THIS time. It's also intended to help people relax a bit, and to feel > connected to one another. A short process is OK (reading a poem, singing a song), but in a meeting with 30+ people where each person makes a statement on their emotional status, sometimes this can last over 30 minutes and put people to sleep. >Actually, my understanding of consensus is that we are not debating so much as >using our intelligence and our perspective to identify potential concerns on behalf of >the comm'ty. > > So -- in my opinion -- consensus is not just about reaching agreement, but > about being thoughtful and intelligent and taking the time to sort it > through to the best of our ability, with the best thinking we can summon at > the time. Consensus is the result of deciding on an issue, not the process by which it is achieved. Consensus is indeed about reaching agreement. Being thoughtful and intelligent and taking time to sort it through is preliminary to consensing. > > You use the term "debate," and of course debate means different things to > different people. To me, it casts people into the position of trying to > persuade or convert others to their thinking. It implies black and white > thinking, a right and a wrong. Debate is often used in political contexts where opposing candidates or opposing camps are trying to persuade an electorate to vote their candidate or platform. In high-school debate, there are no opposing candidates or groups. Each participant takes a position on a resolution (proposal) and tries to present arguments to support his position. If the original resolution has defects, then maybe the arguments against it will focus on its defects rather than what has been proposed. It is this kind of dynamic which is useful whenever a proposal is under consideration by the whole community. > > Blocking consensus is a gift to the comm'ty, but only when done from the position of > the deepest belief that to move forward with the proposal "harms the > comm'ty." " Not "I disagree" or "I don't like this" or "I have strong personal > reservations" but "I believe harm will come to the comm'ty if this proposal > moves forward." > I have personally blocked consensus on original proposals in the last two months. In both cases, I felt that to move forward with the proposal as it was presented would be detrimental to the community. I have not blocked, and I never intend to block, any proposal just for personal reasons. In one case, not enough information had been given to enable me to make a confident decision (when the information later came through I released my block). In another case, I felt that the original proposal was a waste of money and that, after changes were made to the proposal, I lifted my block. Consensus was reached, but the process by which it was reached involved debate and consideration of the pros and cons. Norm Gauss Oak Creek Commons Paso Robles, CA
-
Groupthink Norm Gauss, July 15 2004
-
Re: Groupthink Saoirse, July 16 2004
-
Re: Groupthink Jeanne Goodman, July 16 2004
- Re: Groupthink - preparation prior to consensus Norm Gauss, July 16 2004
- Re: Groupthink Norm Gauss, July 16 2004
- Re: Groupthink Sharon Villines, July 17 2004
- Re: Groupthink Saoirse Charis-Graves, July 17 2004
- RE: Groupthink Susan Sweitzer, July 18 2004
- Consensus resources--was Groupthink Tree Bressen, July 27 2004
-
Re: Groupthink Jeanne Goodman, July 16 2004
-
Re: Groupthink Saoirse, July 16 2004
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.