By Tania Almeida*
Inspired by the original idea of Breaking Robert Rules, which is authored by the mentor of the Consensus Building method, Larry Susskind, the book When Most Isn't Enough It is aimed at leaders who manage meetings, groups and projects, as well as those who make decisions based on a collegiate body. It offers tools to avoid arbitrary decisions that are part of the daily lives of leaders, whenever possible, and decisions based on voting (here we break Robert's rule) - when majorities are prestigious, generating opposition from minorities.
Lawrence Susskind is the founder of Consensus Building Institute and works professionally in the teaching and practice of Consensus Building on collective issues. He is teacher of MIT (MIT), where he coordinates the Department of Urban Studies and Environmental Policy Planning. He also directs the Public Disputes Harvard Law School. Jeffrey Cruikshank is an editor and author in the field of administration, while Duzert, with a postdoctoral degree in public disputes, is a professor at the Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration at FGV. Together they worked in important Brazilian companies, such as Embraer, and are specialists in land use negotiation and urbanization processes.
Consensus Building is an inclusive and participatory instrument and enables benefits that are paramount in collective situations: the preservation of differences and disagreements, consideration for the interests of all, including those of minorities, and the construction of team spirit.
It is a procedure usually coordinated by a leader(s) who master(s) the Consensus Building methodology and tools and who are part of a team of facilitators in collective issues. It is important that this coordination also uses creativity to add value to collective participation.
In this conversation, I will allow myself to mix ideas from this work – which provides us with a summary table in each chapter – with others from Susskind's original work. I also need to confess my passion for the subject and the attempt to adopt its guidelines in everyday situations – from leading teams to institutional decision-making.
What is Consensus
In this line of reasoning, Consensus is understood to be a solution that all those involved can live with, obtained by articulating everyone's ideas on a given topic, which has reached a better level than the previously existing one.
As it is a participatory and inclusive instrument, it feeds on differences and is available to harmonize them, as if composing a patchwork quilt. The more distinct the patches in colors and patterns, the more creativity they will demand from the craftsman (in this case, the dialogue facilitators) and the greater the beauty will be given to the result.
The importance of Mediation
Consensus Building Facilitators should base their work on the same principles as Mediation and on the set of attitudes that it advocates: autonomy of will, identification of position, interests and values, customized and mutually beneficial solutions, time and voice for all in a balanced way , authorship of solutions in the hands of participants, generation of information as food for decision making, and absence of winners and losers.
Mediation as a procedure can also integrate stages of Consensus Construction, whenever a more direct or formal negotiation window can deconstruct impasses.
The essential steps of Consensus Building
Consensus Building is aimed at solving problems of a collective nature, but it can guide the culture of any kind of coexistence that remains continuous over time, permeate the construction of projects between people, government and governance bodies, and be the basis of collegiate decision-making.
Considering all these scenarios, from its origin and throughout its path, it must be inclusive and collaborative.
Individual interviews with people or groups will help in mapping all those involved (important not to leave out actors for and against), in identifying the initial interests of each actor and in the consequent construction of an inclusive agenda:
- the call for a joint meeting it needs to be concise and provoke a real interest in participating; the special interest of each one, previously identified, must be mentioned or touched there;
- the coordination of the dialogue it needs to be legitimized by all and must guarantee a voice and time for all; it will take place with a single leader or with a team, which will have a coordinator;
- some ground rules (rules of coexistence) must be agreed or presented in advance, as they will guarantee the first consensus: dialogue must flow;
- judgment and criticism people should not be part of the conversation, making the exhibition of ideas a safe place for expression; if necessary, we criticize ideas and not people;
- each actor is invited (or representative) to the exhibition, asking you to use the first person singular to express yourself: I think…, I would like…, I believe…; protagonism is encouraged;
- don't talk a second time without everyone having expressed themselves; for everyone to have a voice, it is necessary to consider the existence and participation of the other as legitimate, based on the care with the speaking time itself;
- the ideas that will integrate the consensus will be analyzed by all, who will manifest themselves as follows: attends me fully; attends me partially; it doesn't answer me, but I can live with it; I can't live with this idea. Only this last type of manifestation motivates the return of some idea to the agenda to receive suggestions, avoiding the discarding of ideas;
- the focus the search for understanding is in ideas and their relevance, not in people; we move from authors and honor their contributions;
- a single text must record the consensus, and it will list the ideas in proportion to their acceptance, without mentioning the authors: the majority / part of / the unanimity of those present proposes…; this reinforces the proposal to focus on ideas, and not on their authorship;
- everyone must take charge of resolutive tasks arising from consensus. The formation of monitoring and action committees, including the actors present, helps in the execution of the consensus and in its co-responsibility. One of your greatest assets!
Where and when to use Consensus
In any collectivity that negotiates differences, common projects, decision making. Classically, public policies and collective issues, such as socio-environmental ones, are preferred scenarios. However, the management of teams and projects and collegiate decisions, such as in Boards of Directors or meetings of partners (or condominiums of all kinds), are equally scenarios that benefit from the gains of consensus - all heard and partially answered by the mutually beneficial solutions built on co-authorship. It's not utopia!
When Most Isn't Enough – collective bargaining method for building consensus, by Lawrence Susskind, Jeffrey Cruikshank and Yann Duzert
Publisher FGV, 221 pages
Do you already know our series of free e-Books? check out on this link and happy reading!
* Tania Almeida – Master in Conflict Mediation and Dialogue Facilitator between individuals and/or legal entities. For 40 years, she has been designing and coordinating dialogue processes aimed at mapping, crisis prevention, change management and conflict resolution. She is the creator and founder of the MEDIARE System, a set of three entities dedicated to dialogue – research, service provision, teaching and social projects.
Leave a comment