Dear Bui,
You propose the following definition:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel
is the best decision but which they can all live with, support,
and commit themselves to not undermine - arrived at without
voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all
members feel that they have been adequately heard, in which
everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees
of influence by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are
avoided, so that all are satisfied with the process.”
May I suggest a slight amendment, adding the two words ‘with or’,
as follows:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel
is the best decision but which they can all live with, support,
and commit themselves to not undermine - arrived atwith or without
voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all
members feel that they have been adequately heard, in which
everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees
of influence by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are
avoided, so that all are satisfied with the process.”
And a voting process in which “everyone has equal power” is, may I
further suggest (as in my original splurb), a consensus vote, a
multi-option preference vote, a Modified Borda Count.
Just because some voting procedures are so dreadful – probably the
worst is the two-option majority vote – does not mean that all
voting procedures are bad.
Peter
Peter Emerson
www.deborda.org
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Harrison Owen
Sent: 15 August 2008 20:30
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
I quite like what Scott Peck says, although when you read it, it
sounds like very hard work, something which can be achieved only
occasionally and under special circumstances. I wonder whether the
truth is rather different. Indeed I might suggest that the vast
majority of decisions made in any group or organization occur by
consensus. There is no argument, no great discussion, “it”
whatever it was, just seemed like the right thing to do – and that
is what happened. Somewhere along the line we came to the notion
that decision is always a matter of formal action, constrained by
rules and procedure. This certainly seems to be the reality in a
number of organizations – which I find totally claustrophobic!
Probably just me – but my experience is that the essence of life
is deciding. Most of the time it just sort of flows. But there are
certainly times when it gets bumpy and hard and most usually that
happens when I try to force things. Crazy?
Harrison
Harrison Owen
189 Beaucaire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207-763-3261 (Summer)
301-365-2093 (Winter)
Website www.openspaceworld.com
Personal Website www.ho-image.com
OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Bui Petersen
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 1:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
I have been absent from this list for a rather long time. Life has
intervened again (I have just moved from Vancouver to St. John's,
Newfoundland) and kept me away from anything to do with Open
Space. But the discussion on consensus makes me come out from
hiding.
Harrison, I agree with much of what you say. However, I think the
difficulty with any discussion on consensus is that everybody has
a different interpretation of what "consensus" means. The way I
see it, consensus is not something you come at easily. Reaching
what I consider to be true consensus requires a process that gives
plenty of space for disagreements to be voiced. If a solution can
be found that everyone believes is the best and most reasonable
(considering the alternatives), and that everyone is willing to
support, that could be considered consensus. It requires a lot of
time and effort and is not always practical or even desirable.
What irritates me the most is when people talk about consensus as
if it only means a strong majority, as in "8 out of 10 support
this options; it looks like we have consensus. A more common
problem, however, is that people suppress their disagreement in
order to not be seen as "difficult".
The most thorough definition of consensus that I have come across
is:
"Consensus is a group decision - which some members may not feel
is the best decision but which they can all live with, support,
and commit themselves to not undermine - arrived at without
voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all
members feel that they have been adequately heard, in which
everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees
of influence by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are
avoided, so that all are satisfied with the process. The process
requires the members to be emotionally present and engaged; frank
in a loving, mutually respectful manner; sensitive to each other;
to be selfless, dispassionate, and capable of emptying themselves;
and possessing a paradoxical awareness of both people and time,
including knowing when the solution is satisfactory, and that it
is time to stop and not re-open the discussion until such time
that the group determines a need for revision." [© 1988, Valley
Diagnostic, Medical, and Surgical Clinic, Inc. of Harlingen, Texas
and the Foundation for Community Encouragement, Knoxville,
Tennessee] (as quoted by M. Scott Peck).
My two cents.
Bui
Harrison Owen wrote:
Peter – Tyranny by the majority is certainly a downside of
Democracy as practiced in my country (USA). That said, it seems to
me that there are circumstances where it is the preferable
alternative. The passage of the Civil Rights Act here in the US
was vociferously and often violently opposed by a very vocal
minority, however I would doubt that many black Americans opposed
the vigorous enforcement of that act, and fortunately (for the
good of the country) a majority of all Americans, regardless of
hue, were in agreement.
Consensus politics has much to commend it, but it too has its
downsides. Resolution at the lowest common denominator is one
such, which often appears to be no resolution at all.
Alternatively, the whole system may simply become paralyzed. At
such times, I for one find myself longing for a straight up or
down vote. There is also such a thing a Tyranny of Consensus, I
think.
Perhaps it is useful to think in terms of both/and as opposed to
either/or? For example, Majority Rule, as in the case of the Civil
Rights act, was possible only because of a prior consensus in the
American Population that the Rule of Law was to be preferred even
if you were on the wrong side of the Law.
I suspect that the situation is infinitely more complicated than
the simple alternative (Consensus/Majority Rule). My learning has
been that our capacity to design and implement effective systems
of all sorts (political, corporate, etc) is limited at best. We
simply cannot comprehend the infinite complexity and random
occurrences (essential chaos), characteristic of all living
systems. Our solutions are always approximations, and try as we
might, we will never get it “right” – and for sure we will never
be in control. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t keep trying,
but I think it is essential that we understand the true status of
our creations – they are maps, and never to be confused with the
territory. Like all maps, some are better than others, and as
conditions change these maps become more or less relevant/accurate.
We really get in trouble when we decide that there is “One Right
Way.” This effectively limits our options and reduces the living
space (open space). Pushed to extremes the system will die – which
is the end state of all systems, regardless. When you run out of
space/time you run out of life. Fortunately our maps do not create
the systems, and our systems are infinitely more robust than our
designs could ever be. Are they perfect? No. They are always on
the way to something new. And if they ever get “there” that will
be the end, I think.
Harrison
Harrison Owen
189 Beaucaire Ave
Camden, ME 04843
207-763-3261 (Summer)
301-365-2093 (Winter)
Website www.openspaceworld.com
Personal Website www.ho-image.com
OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Peter Emerson
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 5:21 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
Dear Jack,
They key, then, is to ask these folks, do they believe in
democracy? Yes? Oh jolly good. And do they believe democracy is
for everybody, or just a majority? And if they agree to the
former, away you go.
Mediation works only when the parties to the dispute agree to it.
Democracy should work for all democrats. Russians and Georgians
claim the adjective. But the idea that a majority can determine
the fate of an unwilling minority should be abhorrent… to both.
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Emerson
Director, The de Borda Institute
36 Ballysillan Road
Belfast BT14 7QQ
028 90 711795
078 377 17979
[email protected]
www.deborda.org
The Borda count "is the best protection ever devised from the
tyranny of the majority." Professor Sir Michael Dummett.
From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Jack Martin Leith
Sent: 14 August
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A Common Consensus
Peter,
Thanks for taking the trouble to explain the method in so much
detail. I've turned your post into a Word document and filed it
under Decision Making Methods for future reference.
The challenge is getting people's agreement to use the method.
Catch-22!
Warm wishes,
Jack
Jack Martin Leith
Now-to-New activist
Bristol, United Kingdom
Mobile: 07831 840541 (+44 7831 840541)
Skype: jackmartinleith
email: [email protected]
www.jackmartinleith.com
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists andOSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1611 - Release Date:
8/14/2008 6:20 AM
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists andOSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ==========================================================osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives of [email protected]:http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1614 - Release Date:
8/15/2008 5:29 PM
* * ========================================================== [email protected]
------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change
your options, view the archives [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
