[Oe List ...] Respectful Dialogue

[R Williams]

As someone said about 4 emails back, there is no perfect decision-making process, and anything can be misused and abused.  Consensus works in a "classless" group where the power is in the center of the table.  A "leader," "first among equals" or anyone assuming authority and expertise can decide to use coercion and manipulation.  But this is a problem only if the rest of the body allow themselves to be manipulated and coerced.  True "equals" will use rational persuasion.
   
  Many of the people I work with in my local community think consensus represents the "lowest common denominator," where you just keep boiling the pot down to something everyone can agree to.  I think of it as a "synergistic" process where all the parts/contributions are folded in but the outcome resembles none of the parts.  This does indeed take time.  Our summer research assemblies were great consensus-building events, and the process, I believe, continued beyond the summer until the real consensus emerged after the product of the assemblies had been field tested.  In fact, maybe consensus is a journey and not a destination.
   
  It's not like consensus is some sacred process.  It's a functional way to have everyone move with conviction and commitment toward some objective they all agree is desirable. The consensus-making process breaks down when people do not have a pre-articulated common objective, like a vision and mission  When used effectively consensus is more than just utilitarian, and becomes part of the culture of the organization.

  Randy

frank bremner <fjbremner at hotmail.com> wrote:
      .hmmessage P  {  margin:0px;  padding:0px  }  body.hmmessage  {  FONT-SIZE: 10pt;  FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma  }    I have two images about "consensus" which may help in the current discussion.  I too have noticed how "consensus" can silence the dissenter, or the person with a "but .....", or the person with a "po" (Edward de Bono's name for an item that wopn't fit into "yes" or "no").  I've been thinking about this through my work with high school students, using ICA/ToP methods, at school level.  And then again working with high school students at state level, where sitting around talking ("blah!") was "the method" being used by those in charge.
 
 
(1)
At a LENS seminar in Adelaide in 1974 or so, David Zahrt used the idea of a "map" to illustrate "consensus".  This really grabbed my imagination.  The "consensus" is a map of "the lay of the land".
 
(2)
In the 80s, when working with high school students, I developed the "map of the lay of the land" to include the disagreements, the fuzzy bits that wouldn't flatten out, the edgy bits that wouldn't straighten up.  In other words, the consensus could be a "map orf the may of the land" that represented the real "lay of the land".  The participants then have to own that "lay of the land" as belonging to the whole group and then work with it.  
 
The result might be something very articulate, and containing elements of paradox or natural tensions, and might emerge during the planning (or whatever) session.  Or the result might be something for a team to go away and work on.
 
At least, with the "'lay of the land" in front of them, participants can start to see the interfaces or connections between various viewpoints - "what do we have in common?"  How do these items relate to each other?  Is there "A and B" rather than "A or B"?
 
 
For me, taking this approach got around the (often false and imposed) urgency of "forming a consensus now", which can lead to only the loudest voices being heard, or the status quo (also known as "the party line") being reinforced.  And on one hand bringing some pre-prepared model was OK ("having a model"), and one the other hand it wasn't (it was "lobbying").
 
Taking the approach in (1) and (2) above honoured all participants and all contributions.  Even the slightest "but ..." could hint at a breakthrough or a new insight.  It's like Paul Dirac thinking (out in left field) "Why can't we have negative matter?", and laying the groundwork for the theory of anti-matter and black holes.
 
Cheers from Adelaide, where we've been celebrating the Nobel Prize achievements of the father-and-son Bragg team some decades ago.
 
Frank Bremner
 
 
 
 


 
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net


       
---------------------------------
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20071015/98b71ba1/attachment.html