Is Agreement Consensus

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) believes that decisions are taken in a broad consensus. [67] The IETF has firmly refrained from defining a mechanical method of verifying such a consensus, apparently believing that such codification leads to attempts to “play the system”. Instead, a working group or BoF chair must express the “sense of the group.” Make sure everyone understands the different options used for consent/denial in your group. Often people are confused and block when they would really like to be by their side. Sometimes people are afraid of blocking, when they are deeply unhappy and instead use a more lenient form of disagreement. Ask people what their problems are with the proposal and if they have any proposals on how to address them. Effective group decisions are a skill that can be learned. As a result, many large employees successfully use consensus to run their businesses and have developed innovative techniques to support and accelerate decision-making. “Lack of consensus reflects differences in theoretical positions” The key components of the Quaker-based consensus are the belief in a common humanity and the ability to decide together. The goal is “unity, not unanimity.” We ensure that the group members speak only once until others are heard and promote a diversity of thought. The moderator is seen as a service to the group rather than as a responsible person.

[22] In the Quaker model, as in other consensus decision-making processes, the articulation of the consensus that emerges allows members to express themselves clearly on the preliminary decision. Since members` views will be taken into consideration, they are likely to support them. [23] Many large groups use a proposal-based consensus, in which, instead of starting the discussion with an open question, a proposal is developed by a subgroup. The whole membership discusses this proposal and amends, accepts or rejects it. This is often the case in plenary, but it could also be done in small groups. There are many reasons why you want to divide a large session into small groups for part of a consensus process. If so, each small group can take on another topic or task. Even when parallel groups discuss the same topic, more people can actively explore a topic at the same time, saving time in the long run and increasing participation. If you use more people in this way, it can increase the energy in space and allow you to discuss emotionally charged topics that would be difficult in a large group. Finally, concentrated tasks, such as proposal development, can be done more effectively by a small group.