Full text of "Building United Judgment: A Handbook for Consensus Decision Making"

See other formats

Table of Contents

PREFACE -

Page

vii

■ •

NOTES ON OUR STYLE

* * + * # t

+ * •

i * * ■ * •

'CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: WHY USE CONSMSUS;

WHEN TO USE CONSENSUS .

■

■ *

\-n

l*-v

■

♦ ■

!••«* +

» •

What Is Consensus

Kinds of Decision-»MiWng Structures.,

The Inspirational Fart: Majority Rule vs. Consensus .
The Cautionary Part: Can Your Group Use Consensus?

* «

* •

* *

* » +

4 * *

2
k "

- •

CHAPTER 2 A STEP- BY-STEP PROCESS FOR CONSENSUS 11

. . ..

Preparing for frroUp Discussion * 11

Group Discussion: \ Building United Judgment . . 12

'Mating the Decision , , , ';ssxor . . . . ^ . . , ■ 13

CHAPTEft 3 ATTTtODtS AND CONSENSUS 15

Attitudes WLioh Impede Consensus 15

Attitudes That Support Consensus * 19

The Rewards %: u a >. * * ♦ « . . . 21

■■

CHAPTER k YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THE CONSENSUS PROCESS 23

%#,

■ _■ ■

fl ■ #

Your Contribution r *•»«•»••«* %* . 23

Your Responsibility for Others-* 1 -Participation 2*+

;iixcy

CHAPTER 5 WHEN AGIft»:.tf5NT CANNOT BE REACHED

' -V ■ . r i,

■—*-*■* + -. *rf *■

M r +

Background •-•«•»*»•*•••**<*••-*•*»***•*• 27

A Definition of "Blocking" ■ ,,*.«*, 28

Deciding Whether to Block . • . ■ .>W \ 30

Alternatives to Blocking , • 31

When a Decision is Blocked 32

CHAPTER 6 STRUCTURING YOUR MEETING 39

• ■

Meeting Phases

Using Agendas.

WorkJbag Outside of the Meeting

Doing Discussion

Recording and Implementing Decisions .

Evaluations ....

• *

+ ■

* • *

* * • *

* •

* * +

• •

•

Page
CHAPTER 7 THE HOLE OF THE GROUP FACILITATOR 5 1

■

What Is a Facilitator? m

Sharing Facilitation .!!!,....! 51

Facilitative Functions !!.'....!.'!!!].'!!.'.! 52

CHAPTER 8 COMMUNICATION SKILLS gj

Listening- ^

Feedback and Criticism " „ !!!!!!!!! 65

'■

CHAPTER 9 WORKING WITH EMOTIONS . . . . - 69

Why Be Concerned About Peelings? 69

The Sources of Feelings in Groups 70

Diagnosis: What's Going On? ♦ . * '" " 71

When Feelings Are a Problem . . - • [ [ [ * * \ 71

When Feelings Help a Group ..,..«,, + 75

CHAPTER 10 CONFLICT AND PROBLEM SOLVING 77

Guidelines for Responding to Conflict ■ . , ♦ « 77

Creative Problem Solving ftQ

**^~" " - - ."■ * III I I I I 83

Mediation

CHAPTER 11 TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING 85

Take Your Group Seriously .«....*. 86

Share Responsibility , gy

Encourage Social Interaction **,».!*. I I 90

Increase Involvement and Trust [ * [ 91

Help New Members Become Part of the Group * * - 94

CHAPTER 12 ADAPTATIONS OF THE PROCESS FOR SPECIAL SITUATIONS 97

Formalised Process , + p + 97

Representative Consensus Decision Making + 99

The Majority Rule Escape Clause !!!■!! 100

The Minority Rule Escape Clause . . 102

The "Consensus-Trust" Convention Model , . . . ( XQk

CHAPTER 13 COMMON PROBLEMS: WHAT TO DO ABOUT THEM 107

Polarised Factions . , \ jq7

Endless Discussion , '"*}■ \ 109

Low Quality Decisions , ] [ [ * £j i Jill

Nonparticipation by Some Members ;.**\ \ * 113

Some Individuals Dominate Discussion 115

A Group Member Apparently Won't Cooperate -,!.■!.. 116

BIBLIOGRAPHY ......... J » 119

*-*■

y-v

- U

In February of 1978, several Center for
Conflict Resolution staff members and
friends met to begin working together to
produce a publication on consensus de-
cision making for tommunity use.

The Center for Conflict Resolution (CCR)
is a nonprofit collective in Madison,
Wisconsin, which teaches other groups
skills in group process, conflict reso-
lution and problem solving, CCR does
this by sponsoring workshops, by pro-
viding consultation and crisis inter-
vention, and by offering written /
materials through a resource center,
QCR works with diverge groups including
food and housing cooperatives, various
collectives, the public school system,
city government j university groups , and
many others. Although many of these
organizations do not use consensus de-
cision making, CCR has remained commit-
ted to this process as a way of
increasing group cohesion, member in-
volvement, and meeting effectiveness.

Our original intent was to write a
short "how-to-do-it rr piece that a
reader could skim rapidly. We soon
discovered, however, that to discuss
the skills of using consensus in a use-
ful way, we also had to ^discuss a wide
variety of other group process skills.
We found there is no sharp division
between good group structure, meeting
organization* communication skills,
values, and the ability to make good
decisions by consensus. They are all
interconnected.

^-^ From our original project emerged a

handbook on how to be the kind of group,
- L and the kind of group member, that can
use consensus decision making well- We
weren't able to include everything we

wanted to say about every subjects but
we've tried at least to introduce some
basic and useful concepts in areas, such
as communication skills and problem
solving when we weren't able to cover
the subject thoroughly.

The layout of this handbook is a
scrambled montage of rT main text 11 and
boxes containing personal statements,
examples, artifacts from the writing*
process and additional bits of infor-
mation. We've organized the book this
way for several reasons:

—First, any smooth, logical pre-
sentation would be artificial. We
found it extremely difficult to choose
a sequence for our chapters since al-
most every section is relevant to every
other section.

* **

— Second, we want to demonstrate that
the ideas we present here were developed
through interaction — a long, jumbled
process that included painstaking reason-
ing, flashes of inspiration, argument ,
humor, and always, sharing and building
on each other's thoughts. We can't
count the number of people who contrib-
uted to this work by sharing their in-
sights and experiences on different
subjects* We want you to be aware of
this dialogue, to recognize that it
isn't finished , and to become a part of
it. You and others will respond and
build from this book, which is only an
arbitrary stopping point in the dialogue.
(If we didn't have other things to do,
we might have gone on revising and
adding forever, )

— Finally, while we hope you find
this book enjoyable, we don't mean for
your reading of it to be smooth. We
want you to stop and think, to see

* p

VII

comments other people have made, and
to ponder over contradictions in our
ideas and experience. We believe that
such a struggle to understand is part
of the process of real learning, and
it is certainly part of the process of
consensus decision making,

This book is written for everyone who
has been working with consensus, A new
approach to the process and a new syn-
thesis of concepts can be useful both
to beginners and to "old timers," The
book is also written for members of
newly forming groups who are consider-
ing consensus and for groups that may
want to change to consensus from some
other decision-making process. Finally,
it attempts to include groups which are
not planning to use consensus, but which
can benefit by adapting some of the
ideas we present to tiieir own methods*
While consensus itself is more apprd-
priate for some kinds of groups than
others, we believe -the values and
skills we describe for consensus groups
can help any group. They can promote
the effort to elicit the best contribu-
tion from each member and to provide
the most satisfactory kind of experience
for participants,

We have tried to make this handbook as
widely applicable as possible. Since
we believe the skills we describe can

be used by a wide variety of groups, we
tried to speak to a broad audience. But
we realize that everything we say comes
from our own experience and you may want
to know what kind of people we are as
you evaluate our ideas for your situation.

As individuals, we describe ourselves
with the words "educator," "activist,"
"scientist," and "counselor." We all
have backgrounds that include univer-
sity education and work in academic or
service agency environments. We have
also been involved in alternative or-
ganisations including cooperatives
and collectives, and our strongest
interest and excitement are invested
in the latter arena. Most importantly,
we have all worked in groups — lots of
groups — and we see group membership as
an important part of our lives. In
fact, one reason we struggled together
for so long writing this handbook was
our commitment to our own project group ,
The satisfaction of working together
and the excitement of developing ideas
and learning with each other was an im-
portant motivation for each of us.

Other individual motivations included:

Groups that night not find this helpful:

Inhabitants of monasteries where silfence is the rule I

Idren below ege 12, more or less, though it could be
Simplified and used to great advantage by the very young

Groups from very diverse educational and opportunity back-
grounds,, but they could be trained to use it, using
considerable patience and understanding

\fl*

e *

»^^*a

■ a ■

VIM

^cause of the long time spent working
on this project, membership in the writ*
Ing group changed several times during
the three-year period.

In addition to the four of us listed as
authors, ve received invaluable assis^
tance from Elaine Nesterick, Education
Coordinator of Intra- Community Coopera-
tive > a network of food cooperatives
in the Midwest that are served by the
ICC Warehouse in Madison, Wisconsin*
For most of the project j Elaine worked
with us ae a full participating meisber
of the writing group. Her influence on
this mmial has been important and

pro round, Klaine left the project a
few months before completion due to a
reassessment of her ovn priorities, so
the final version of the book does not
necessarily reflect Elaine's own "view-
point. :

Janice Kinsolving was also very active
in the first half of the project. She
foimd it necessary to leave in the fall
of 1980 to make way for other activities
in her life. She also is not listed as
an author since she cannot be held
responsible for the final version of
the book. Yet this manual beare a
strong mark of her contribution,

■

—

— A long frustration both with
Tl Robert's Rules 1 ' decision making and
with poorly structured consensus, re-''
suiting in a dedication to developing
methods which can make the "consensus
process effective. "The ideals of
consensus needed to be put into a con-
crete framework."

— 1T I believe people always want more
than efficiency from their groups . . *
They want to experience a meeting not
as the smooth workings of a body of
rules, but as an occasion of being with
others, I would be personally satis-
fied if I thought our work increased
the times when this really happens."

--"I'm doing this book because I
think consensus is radically exciting
and fun — and I learn about people and
how the world works from doing consen-
sus * . * Consensus embodies so many
of the things I value. It's healthy.
It T s intelligent, effective and prac-
tical. There's space for stretching,
kisses , humor and silence. The
process/product balance of consensus
pleases me."

— "In some areas of 'expertise' there
is an advantage for individuals who keep
their skills to themselves. People get
ahead by being 'better 1 at something.
But in consensus, you cannot exercise
your skills alone. Skilled people need
other skilled people to work with.
Since I want to work in consensus -■ ."
groups ... it is to my advantage to
develop what I know and share it with
others as much as I can."

— "I joined this group because I'd
discovered I loved consensus . . . and
I wanted to learn much, much more about
it, I was hungry for dialogue about
how it worked, where its origins lay,
and how it could evolve. I wanted to
grapple with it, understand it, and make
it my own rather than to continue to
float on the surface through rather
idyllic group meetings."

February, 1981

Chel Aveiy, Brian Auvine, Barb Streibel,

Lonnie Weiss
The Consensus Handbook Writing Project

Group

■

A^V^A^^ A^ VV ^ Vs ^VV SA^V S V

C#~>Lh&£vl-GhU^»^

; ■(' t.

— *->\JTr

tr*

\u^U

rfZ-t^

Uv£*j M^^ '^ WA&A tv £t*^J**+a**-->

—£*^-/£? &Ht£tCteS -^C-j

Spftm&, /?7#

aSEjr ^7 5 *^

pr&Clt ^ __>.. .._

&e<f+&L

... ^

5, /

VtJL-fijX

AUlj /%)

e-&xA

tTWvuJL

NJv

4>«"

TA Cm^LaS^u^

-_-r r ■■.

(bs^ri K^

cl^LcL

fr-L-

8*>*

d^e

£.^*JL -/Ulflf,adVt*»

LW*-£

StMAJL

I --

i
I

Notes on Our Style

PRONOUNS

Gender

When speaking of a person whose gender is
unidentified, ue use "he or she" in odd-
numbered chapters, and "she or he" in even-
numbered chapters- Our intention is to
avoid confusion while attempting to use
the two variations equally; if one version
appears more than the other, it is acciden-
tal,

"We"

First-person plural -pronouns ("we, 11 "us"
and "our") are used only when referring
specifically to the authors, . When speak-
ing of "everyone," or "most people in
this society, 11 third person ("they") is
used. This distinction is made to avoid
confusion, not to set the authors apart
from the readers. When we say, "People
in this culture learn to hide their emo-
tions," for example, we mean to include
ourselves in the generalization.

EXAMPLES

Many examples are included in the text
to illustrate principles and techniques.
Some examples are drawn from real-life
experience and are recorded accurately,
using correct names. Other examples are
purely imaginary. While no special ef-
fort has been made to distinguish real
from imaginary examples, it is usually
apparent by the wording which is which.
All boxed examples, unless otherwise in-
dicated, are from life.

REFERENCES

At the end of most chapters is a section
entitled, "Most Highly Recommended Re-
soitrces." The publications mentioned in
these sections are the ones we consider
to be the best available on the subject
of the particular chapter* Not. every
relevant reference from the BIBLIOGRAPHY
is always included. Full citations for
the publications mentioned in these sec-
tions can be found in the BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Quotations which appear in boxes are fol-
lowed by full citations only when the
publication quoted is not included in the
BIBLIOGRAPHY. See the BIBLIOGRAPHY for
complete information on other referenced
publications.

When a quotation is attributed to the
name of an individual, the person is
either one of the authors or one of our
friends/associates who reviewed early
drafts of the text and made comments.

TYPES OF BOXES

We include two types of boxes: those
that contain artifacts from the writing
process, and those that contain examples,
additional material, or relevant quota-
tions from other sources, (See the
PREFACE for an explanation of why we
have used this layout style.) Below is
the "code" for the different types of
boxes :

——m

■ ■ ■ ^- ■■-" ;>j-;;oCv!'SJ-: : 'i;i>S;i£".

ARTIFACT
OF WRITING
PROCESS

.VX',',V '

:::::->:■::::*::;

■ .Si i . _ _ . .'.

»w ■:■----■■■■■■

^^xiii-S^ijg::^::^

er 1

Introduction: Why Use Consensus; When
to Use Consensus

Consensus decision making can be a power-
ful tool for bulding group unity and
strength, and for choosing wise, creative
courses of action. However if attempted
under the wrong circumstances or without
a good understanding of the technique,
the consensus process can result in con-
fusion, disruption or unrest in a group.

We have written this book because we be-
lieve in the benefits of consensus, in
its power to develop strong groups and
excellent decisions. In this chapter we
will be promoting consensus, describing
it in all its glory so you will be en-
couraged to try using it in your group,
if you haven't already. We want you to
share our enthusiasm for this satisfying
and productive approach to group decision
making.

We will also be cautioning you in this
chapter, advising against the hazards of
using consensus inappropriately. We will
describe the conditions under which con-
sensus is most likely to work well so you
can assess whether your group is likely
to be successful in making decisions by
consensus.

For those who choose to use consensus,
the following chapters in this book de-
scribe structures and techniques that can
help the process work smoothly in your
group rather than backfiring. Chapter 11,
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING^ for in-

stance, describes how to prepare a group
to /use consensus. Chapter 2, A STEP- BY-
STEP PROCESS FOR CONSENSUS^ explains how
to use consensus in concrete, nitty-
gritty detail. Other chapters, such as
COMMUNICATION SKILLS and CONFLICT AND
PROBLEM SOLVING offer approaches to on-
going needs of a group using consensus

decision making* These and other chap-
ters in this book can be applied to
groups that use other decision -making
processes; adapting the cooperative
values and assumptions behind consensus
can improve all kinds of group decision
making .

WHAT IS CONSENSUS?

Simply stated, consensus is different
from other kinds of decision making be-
cause it stresses the cooperative devel-
opment of a decision with group members
working together rather than competing
against each other. The goal of consen-
sus is a decision that is consented to
by all group members. Of course 3 full
consent does not mean that everyone must
be completely satisfied with the final
outcome — in fact, total satisfaction is
rare. The decision must be acceptable
enough, however, that all will agree to
support the group in choosing it.

A MEETING

old friends

all their antennae out

weaving together a fabric of agreement

liow such listening can a room bold?

in a sea of ambiguity

each on© takes a turn
catching a thread of clarity
and offering it to the rest

caring sensitive fingers

probing the tangle of ideas

sorting the threads

tying loose ends

thoughtfully

holding the pattern- that-might-be
in the mind r s eye i

the skill and patience

intelligence and creativity
of a do sen lovers

thinking

building with fine fan&liar tools

in an uncharted land * *?-

these procedures for over 300 years. At
different times in history, consensus has
also been used by groups in Africa , Spain
and Russia , as well as by Native American
people* Consensus is also popular with
alternative community groups, such as
cooperatives and collectives , that wish
to maximise individual input and satis-
faction, fairness and human-ness in their

meetings. Consensus decision making in
modern American society is not limited to
Quakers and community activists , however.
Forms of consensus are often used by uni-
versity departments , committees of pro-
fessional people, and in many other
diverse situations , often without actually
being labeled "consensus." The princi-
ples of consensus can have broad applica-
tions and can be adapted to a wide Variety
of situations where people want to in-
crease the creativity, sensitivity and
fairness of the decision making structures.

By Pamela Haines
Dandelion* Spring ;

In "classic" consensus decision making,
every member must consent to the decision
before the group can adopt it. If even
a single member has a strong objection to
the decision (for example, it violates a
deeply felt moral belief), then the in-
dividual has the power to "block" the de-
cision and the group must keep searching
for a new, acceptable solution.

Not all groups which practice consensus
do so in this classic sense, allowing
individuals the full power to block the
whole group for as long as they feel they
must. Whether a group goes to this de-
gree or not, the emphasis in practicing
consensus is on listening to everyone f s
ideas and taking all concerns into con-
sideration in an attempt to find the
most universally acceptable decision pos-
sible at a particular time.

Consensus is most often associated with

the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)

who have successfully used and developed

KINDS OF DECISION-MAKING STRUCTURES

In a continuum of decision-making pro-
cesses, consensus represents the extreme
of highest participation and involvement
from the most people. Below is a brief
description of some other decision making
procedures, the kind of participation in-
volved in each method, and the advantages
and disadvantages of each. Elementary as
this short discussion is, you should get
some basis for comparing consensus to
alternative methods and for analysing how
appropriate consensus may be in different
situations*

1. Autocratic : Ctae person, usually
the most powerful individual in a hier-
archy, has the authority to make deci-
sions for the group. Decisions can be
made quickly and consistently since they
all rely on the judgment of a single
person. The autocratic method is con- "
venient, simple, and can be effective in
situations where strong, recognizable
leadership is called for, as well as in
day-to-day decisions so simple that one
person can possess all the necessary in-
formation relevant to the decision.

■

The disadvantages of autocratic decision
making stem from its reliance on one per-
son's ideas, values, experience and knowl-
edge* The quality of the decision may
suffer from this limited input. People
who are expected to carry out the deci-
sion may not be committed to doing so be-
cause they are not involved in making
the decisions, do not. understand the
reasons behind them^ or feel imposed upon
by the decision maker.

2. Autocratic -with polling: A single
person with authority makes decisions for
the group after asking for the opinions

of others involved. Consulting with others
gives the decision maker more information

and a greater understanding of what -other
people want and what might work well.
This kind of decision making also informs
the consulted group members of the issues
being considered and may prepare them -for
greater participation in future decisions.
However this approach lacks- opportunity
for interact ion , for people. to think
together, to learn each other's needs,
and to develop new ideas out of the
exchange .

3, Minority rule : The decision is
made by a few people in the organisation.
They might be the Board of Directors , a
steering committee, or other top decision
makers in the organisation's structure,
or they may be a committee representing

a variety of positions in the group. De-
cisions by this method are usually man-
aged more quickly than decisions by

larger groups, since only a few individu-
als are involved. There is also oppor-
tunity for exchange of ideas and inter-
action in this method. The amount of
interaction depends on whether the -
decision-making body operates internally
by minority rule, majority rule, or con-
sensus. The quality of the decision and
its acceptability to the larger group
may depend on how well the viewpoints of
different group members are represented
by the decision makers.

4, Majority rule: The decision is
made by choosing a solution which is ac-
ceptable to more than half the entire
group, with each person having equal
power {one person, one vote). Variations
may require a majority of two-thirds, ^
three- fourths, or another fraction. Un-
like the other decision-making methods
described so far, the power to decide lies
with the whole group rather than with one
or a few people. The decision is more
likely to be satisfactory to the group
as a whole because all individuals can
participate. The quality of the decision
will depend on the amount of discussion
before voting, whether the group considers
many alternatives or only a few, and
whether their work was cooperative or

competitive. Of course the more dis-
cussion, the longer the decision will
take, Parliamentary Procedure (Robert's
Rules of Order) is often used to structure
majority- rule decision making. Majority
rule is commonly used In voluntary orga-
nisations, unions, and government bodies.

(4) One thing you could stress in the introduction, is that a
consensus decision making process is broadly used in many settings
without being labeled as such. Project management f and other
interdepartmental projects in large agencies, as well as corporations,
are usually organized as a problem solving process- The proceedures
for problem solving are well known in all administrative circles.
Problem solving as a series of steps, parallels the consensus
process. The two major differences are thatjjbusiness and govern-
ment when problem solving fails, folks fall back on hierarchies
rather than majority rule to make the decision; and5l think in
these settings, problem solving is understood as a scientific
technique quite devoid of a value system* Thats probably also
why it doesn|t work nearly as well in business and government
settings as it does in alternative settings where the value system
is better understood. If this perspective makes sense to you,
I would suggest including it as a part of your context setting
efforts in the introduction-

THE INSPIRATIONAL PART:

MAJORITY RULE vs. CONSENSUS

Majority rule is sometimes held up as
the ideal form of fair decision making.
Often majority rule works veiy well. So
why do we prefer consensus? We believe
there are some inherent problems in ma-
mority rule that a well-executed consen-
sus process can solve. The vignettes
below illustrate some common problems
that you may have experienced in majority-
rule groups.

Your political group is planning a plat-
form for the city elections. Dave pro-
poses that you advocate a fare increase
for the bus system so service can be ex-
panded to outlying areas. *

You say you like the idea of expanding
service* hut you don't think it should be
paid for by a fare increase. You want to
discuss the subject more? but the chair-
person is in a hurry to push this item
through and move on to other issues. It
is obvious that a two- thirds rmjority
supports the plan* so most people aren't
interested in spending more time discuss-
ing it. A quick vote is held* the deci-
sion is recorded in the minutes* and the
discussion moves on to other topics.

After the meeting you and Janet* the only
other person who opposed the fare hike
motion* express your frustration to each
other. As you talk about it* you figure
out another way that expanded bus service
could be financed.' But it's too late to
think of new ideas now* and there wasn r t
a chance to be creative in the meeting.
You are frustrated; your group and the
city are deprived of your ideas* which
may have provided a better solution to
the problem.

Another common problem is shown below:

Your cooperative business is trying to
decide how to reduce expenses. Gary
suggests that you cut back on staff
salaries by only having one person in
the store on the mornings when business
is slower. He presents carefully rea-

saned arguments about how much money
could be saved and about the cost returns
of staff wages at different hours of the
day*

Karen, who doesn r t often speak out at
meetings* says shyly* "But I hate being
in the store alone. There isn r t anyone
to support me if a customer gives me
trouble* and I get rattled when too many
things happen at once. And on the really
slow days* I get so lonely. "

There is a short* awkward silence* Then
the chairperson calls on Phil who says
scornfully * "The facts that Gary present-
ed clearly show that the logical thing to
do is reduce our staff in the mornings. "

As the meeting continues, you observe
that Karen and several other people are
silent and uninvolved in the discussion.
No one else seems to notice or care that
they are not participating.

The scenarios above illustrate some of
the problems that frustrate people in
majority- rule decision making:. Majority
rule involves an assumption of competi-
tion. You "win" if you get the most
people voting on your side; the opponent
"loses," This win/lose approach encour-
ages divisive arguing, each "side" tiying
to prove that they are right and the
others are wrong. People may listen to
each other's arguments not out of concern
for the other's needs or opinions, but to
develop counter arguments which can bene-
fit their own side.

Often, majority- rule groups have a
hierarchy of power in which the opinions
of leaders, experts , or assertive and out-
spoken members carry disproportionate in-
fluence over the rest of the group. Tim-
id individuals or people who find it
difficult to put new ideas into words
can be ignored in such a group , even
though their ideas may be^just as good.
The minority can easily be dispensed
with by outvoting them. So although in'
theory everyone may participate in ma-
jority rule, in reality this method
ensures less democracy than it seems to
promise.

The quality of decisions made with ma-
jority rule may be lower than ideal be-
cause everyone's ideas, including the
innovative and creative ones, are not
necessarily heard. There is a tendency
to expedite discussions and opt for
"efficiency" by settling quickly for the
favored of the two most obvious alterna-
tives. Rarely is the full range of
possible decisions explored. Time may
be saved, but it is hard to measure the
wastefulness and inefficiency of poor
decisions that suffer from lack of
support, possible sabotage by the losing
minority, and the necessity to re-decide
an issue after a quick decision proves
inadequate.

The scenario below shows how consensus
decision making can be a better alterna-
tive when practiced skillfully:

You are a member of a collective that
provides training in interpersonal
communication skills, At one of your
meetings Lisa introduces a new item on
the agenda* She says a professional as-
sociation of educational agencies is
sponsoring a fair for such organizations
and your group has been invited to have
a display at the fair*

"It means they're taking our work seri-
ously^" she says* "I really want to do
it."

Dan addSj "It will be a great way to make
new contacts. " Several group members
talk about the idea enthusiastically.
Someone asks^ "Won't it be a lot of work?"
"I'm willing to do it if someone witl
help; " says Lisa. A couple of people
say they would be interested.

The facilitator asks y "Do we have agree-
ment that we will go ahead and do the
display?"

"Wait a minute , " Lisa says* u Sara^ you
haven't said anything. I'd like to know
what you think. "

"Well; I don't know. I'm uncomfortable
with the idea — but I'm not sure why I-
don 't like it. "

The facilitator suggests that the group
talk about it more. "What possible
problems do people see with this project?"

"Wells f° r one thing , " Mark saySj "we *re
very busy with other things that month
and I f m afraid we 're going to have to
hustle to meet our other commitments if
we have several people working on the
display. "

That comment reminds Al of something and
he makes a remark. People discuss the
pros and cons of the is sue „ playing off
each other's ideas.

Finally Sara says^ "Now I know what is
bothering me r I'm not sure I want us
putting forth so much effort advertising ■
ourselves in professional circles when
we haven r t done an adequate job making

the general public aware of us. We
should be doing outreach to people who
might actually use our services. It
makes me wonder about our priorities. "

Lisa agrees. "I think that's an impor-
tant concern. What can we do about it?"

The facilitator says* "This is an issue
for a long discussion. I suggest we put
the subject of 'outreach ' on our next
agenda. In the meantime* let's have a
brainstorm about how to deal with this
fair. "

Participants toss out suggestions fora-
while without discussing them. Some of
the ideas are obviously unworkable. Some
are silly. But people respond to each
other r s ideas by thinking of new ones
until a long list of proposals has been
developed. ?

"OK* " says the facilitator',
what we r ve got. "

Let r s see

Most people agree that the best sugges-
tion is that the group go ahead and cre-
ate a display for the fair* but try to
make something permanent that would be
appropriate for different settings in
the future. That way* the display could
also be used where it would be seen by
people who might use the group's services.

The facilitator says* "It looks like we
have agreement here. Are there any objec-
tions ? "

■
■

Mark says* "Well* I'm still worried about
whether people have enough time to do it*
but if Lisa and Anna and Rich really want
to put out that much energy* I guess I f m
willing to say* 'go ahead. ttT

Lisa says* rt Sara* since you were con-
cerned about this* will you help with
planning the display* to make sure it
will be appropriate in other contexts?"

Sara agrees to the request and the
meeting proceeds to other issues.

The vignette above shows what can happen
when consensus decision making is used
by a group of people who understand the
skills and principles of consensus and
who work cooperatively together.- Since
the goal is group unity, rather than
beating the opposition, every member is
considered important and the group tries
to listen to and respond to each person.
Everyone's support is needed, so the
softer voices that night be drowned out
in a competitive situation are encour-
aged and attended to, Both feelings and
logical argument are treated as impor-
tant. When a decision is not satisfac-
tory to the group as a whole, even
though a majority may favor it., new
options are explored and often creative
solutions are discovered that would *
otherwise be overlooked*

*
This may all sound too good to be true,
so let us emphasize again that in con-
sensus, group unity does not mean that
each person is delighted with every
decision- It does mean that everyone's
concerns have been considered and that
group members are willing to accept the
decision as a good one for the group,
even when it doesn't represent their
personal first choice.

Argument and conflict do occur. In
fact, conflict is an important element
that spurs people on to clearer thinking,
better understanding and greater crea-
tivity. Although a consensus group may
experience intense and heated disagree-
ment, behind the conflict is an assump-
tion of cooperation: people are commit-
ted to working together to meet everyone r s
needs as best they can. Such a mutually-
supportive process is the source of this
book's title, "Building United Judgment,"

These are idealistic principles. They
are part of our vision of a better world.
But they are not just idealistic— they
are also practical. Our experience with
consensus has shown us that in the
right situations it can work. In fact,
consensus is a practical tool for pursu-
ing our ideals— a better way for working
together and a way for people to learn

and change so they are able to work to-
gether better. Consensus decision making
teaches participants skills and increases
their awareness of themselves and others.
The consensus process is a social change
activity in itself, as well as a tool for
pursuing further goals,

THE CAUTIONARY PART;
CAN YOUR GROUP USE CONSENSUS?

Using consensus is not easy. Consen-
sus assumes certain skills and attitudes
from the group as a whole and from the
individual members, Since many people
have learned to assume a competitive
attitude and to expect the same of oth-
ers, it is difficult to risk changing to
a cooperative approach and to trust oth-
ers to do so also, Some J serious problems
that people have experienced when using
consensus in an unprepared group include:

— One or a few individuals block con-

sensus to further their own power in the
group or to promote their personal advan-
tage ,

— The group is dominated by outspoken
or intimidating members,

— The struggle for unity takes too
much time and discussion goes on and on
without getting anywhere. Meetings may
meander aimlessly without focus , result-
ing in stress 3 boredonij and no decisions,

— Group members become exhausted and
Tr bum out" over time from the extensive
involvement required by the process.

^ ^ ^^v* ^ ^ ^^ ^

/m****n At, Jii^i^U

> 9 A •«►/«.

J*0***Jl S*.*C

Mt>*»s h

a rmr&

M VASW W

I like the Kfigag linkage of consensus as ideal istic, but prac-
tical. The recognition that the consensus process is idealistic,
but yet practical, partially addresses the issue I was raising above.

You may want to expand the section on commitment & satisfaction a
little to clarify this point. I am concerned that some people may per
ceive the possibility of "intense involvement" as a negative. Perhaps
merely clarify that people are mo tin ted to becoming involved more in-
tensely in such an active process mfgKt speak to this. The essential
point is that the intensity of involvement is voluntary and desirable
by the participants, & therefore more satisfying and less alienating*

* A^VA%V ^ M^^

:
:

^NV^ / W W^ NV *

The reason why consensus emerges Is that it is "more practical 11 • There
is an important theoretical point somewhat buried here, that is, that social
; Innovations— such as socialism, for instance—do not win out unless they rA^
;have this practical superiority. Mere moral superiority never got a society V X
anywfeere. Consensus will be widespread insofar as the decisions it pro- v/^
duces are s imply ^eUerjlecisi_qn^: more productive ,, less wasteful, T^

jet

P^A^ A h A s . ln . ^.?^RQL r fi 5 lm a s well as the moral realm.

There are practical answers to these
problems and to other kinds of problems
that arise in consensus decision making.
This book can provide many of those
answers . Before attempting to use con-
sensus, however, it is necessary for a
group to have certain characteristics
and for nembers to possess certain skills
and attitudes that can help the consensus
process succeed, The "prerequisites"
listed below should help you assess your
group f s readiness to use consensus. .-

Group Conditions That Support Consensus

1- Unity of purpose : There should be
a basic core of agreement within and about
the group. Of course there will be many
areas where group members have vaiying

opinions about what is best. But there
must be a unifying base that is recog-
nized and accepted as a common starting
place by all members.

2. Equal access to power for all
members: There should be no formal
hierarchy which gives any member more
authority than other members. Addition-
ally, there should be an effort to
share informal distribution of power.
Ideally, then, there not only is no
"director" or "president," but there is
also an effort to have all members con-
tribute and participate equally, despite
differences in seniority, assertiveness,
and other personal qualities.

3. Autonomy of the group from
external hierarchical structures: It is

very difficult for
sus within its own
group is part of a
does not recognize
such as university

a group to use cons en
operations when the
larger system that
the process. Groups
departments, state

agencies, or divisions of a business have
often experimented with using consensus
and have sometimes been successful.
Their success, though, can easily be
disrupted by interference or mandate from
the larger structure. For example, it is
difficult for a person to participate
within a group as an equal when the same
person is designated "director" by *
associated or controlling bodies.

*** Time : The process of developing
an effective consensus group requires
time spent on group process and relations
between members as well as time spent
making decisions. Consensus groups can
often work very smoothly and efficiently
to make effective, stable decisions , but
a difficult consensus decision cannot be
rushed* If your group does not have the
time to devote, or the patience to use
the time, consensus will be thwarted.

5* A willingness in the group to
attend to process : The way group members
work together to reach decisions is im-
portant and needs attention. Members of
a consensus group must be willing and
able to spend group time discussing pro-
cess and working towards necessary

changes in the process, as well as at-
tending to tasks and decisions.

6, A willingness in the group to
attend to attitudes : Consensus works
well when group members are willing to
work cooperatively and when they feel
they are able to trust each other.
This requires a commitment by individual
members to examine their own attitudes
and to be open to change. Such trust and
cooperation also require a caring group
community which supports the development
of these attitudes.

7. A willingness in the group to
leana and practice skills for meeting
participation, facilitation and communi-
cation* The group must encourage and
assist all of its members to develop
these skills for the group to work well
as a whole.

Analyzing Your Group

The seven conditions described above
are a tough list of qualities for a group
to live up to. Don't be discouraged if
they seem far away from the present
reality in your group. Sometimes a com-
mitment to reach slightly beyond your
grasp can provide extra motivation and
opportunity for positive growth in a
group, We present the list of prerequi-
sites as a set of goals to strive for
and as a description of a strong,
healthy group.

After checking your group 1 equalities
against the list of indicators, you
may find that your group meets or is
close to meeting most of the condi-
tions necessary for using consensus*
Perhaps you are integrating many
qualities of consensus in your deci-
sion making already. Other parts of
this book will help you translate
your potential into actuality. If you
are already using consensus, this manual
can make you aware of your assumptions
and skills and can expand your ability
to think and talk about your group pro-
cess so you can use consensus more
effectively.

If you are using consensus but having
problems with it, the checklist of in-
dicators is a good place to start iden-
tifying sources of your trouble. Are
you weak in a fundamental prerequisite?
Bo you need to change some assumptions
or learn new skills?

If your review of the prerequisite condi-
tions reveals several areas that your
group does not yet meet, we suggest you
use this book to build your group 1 s
skills, awareness, and unity, rather than
attempting a premature and ill-fated ex-
ploration of consensus. When you have
reached the point where you feel ready
to attempt consensus, do it slowly. For
example, you can use consensus for a
•"few, easy decisions first and work up*to
full-time consensus.

Many groups do not possess the qualities
of a consensus group and may never be
able or inclined to do so. If yours is
such a group, you may still be able to
use this book to improve communication,
meetings, or conflict strategies within
the group,

BEFORE YOU BEGIN . . * .

We want to repeat that the skills and
values of consensus can be applied in
many different ways. There is no single
correct method for "doing" consensus*
In the following chapters, we will pre-
sent one model which we have found par-
ticularly useful for a variety of
situations. We encourage you to adapt
this model to the needs of your group*

I see in your book an implicit assumption of a "consensus to use consensus"
on the part of your readership. Thus I think your examples paint too rosy
a picture for those readers who don't share this basic prerequisite, but
would like to* JfttY-ififiM

In my experience consensus decision-nakinp; is an overused
tool, often applied in situations where the conditions are not
present for it to work. Maybe noee effort has to zo into intermediate
steos betv/een an organization's total reliance on consensus (L*yv- m

3tffi u%

decision-making and it's total relaincc on some other for^i.

^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^^*^^^^^^^^^ ^

ADVANTAGES OF CONSENSUS DECISION KAKIKG

1 * Qua I it j of the de c ision : Since
the decision oust be acceptable to a
variety of people, it is more likely to
be examined carefully and to meet com-
plex standards of workability, desira-
bility, and Integrity.
+ *

2. Creativity, Rather than a quick
choice for the favorite of two, or a few,
options , a decision which attempts to
seat everyone's needs will require the
group to produce and consider a vide
range of proposals . Often sore imagina-
tive and creative possibilities are
discovered .

Finally , we want to remind you that learn-
ing to use consensus is a never-ending
process. Consensus doesn ! t operate like
a perfect machine among a group of people
who have the values and skills "down pat."
Even the most experienced users of con-
sensus , if they are sincere, stop fre-
quently to evaluate the ways in which
they put their skills and beliefs into
practice. We are always struggling to
do better, to see our mistakes, and leam
from them. Consensus is a cooperative
learning process through which we support
each other in the struggle to be more
understanding, open, caring and effective
human beings.

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENCED RESOURCES

DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS by Glenn Bartoo
INVERT'S materials

BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE COMMUNITIES^
Chapter k s "The Consensus Decision-
Making Process 11 by The Training/Action
Affinity Croup

3* Commitment and satisfaction* The

■■■!■■■*■ — M-n

struggle to reach consensus requires
isore intense involvement from group mem-
bers* In majority rule, dissenting group
member $ are often committed to the deci-
sion merely by contract * In consensus,
commitisent arises froia involvement ae
well as froa satisfaction*

■

*i* Fostering of values and skills*
Consensus requires people to consider and
demonstrate such values as respect for
others 1 opinions, responsibility for the
group* and cooperation. It also requires
that we leara group process skills-
These values and skills cany over into
other activities.

Chapter 2

A Step-by-Step Process for Consensus

Where do we begin? Tills first chapter
on how to "do" consensus refers to many
concepts and skills, such as "agendas"
and "facilitation," that will not be
fully explained until later in the book.
Yet we decided to begin with this brief,
introductory outline showing how the
consensus process works so : you will have
a framework for placing the ideas we
discuss further in later chapters.
Below is a step-by- step model of how
a decision is developed in consensus
groups. Specific tools and techniques
mentioned here will be explained more
fully in subsequent chapters, We spe-
cifically refer you to Chapters k
through 7 (YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THE
CONSENSUS PROCESS, WHEN AGREEMENT
CANNOT BE REACHED^ STRUCTURING YOUR
MEETINGS and THE ROLE OF THE GROUP
FACILITATOR) for more extensive
"how-to M instructions for putting
consensus into operation.

PREPARING FOR GROUP DISCUSSION

A. An agenda is set at the beginning
of the meeting so members know and
agree on what they will talk about
and In what order, (See "Using
Agendas'* in Chapter 6, STRUCTURING
YOUR MEETINGS. )

B. The facilitator introduces an item
from the agenda (or calls on someone
else to introduce the item), The
introduction should include:

1, A clear definition of the area
being discussed.

2. A clear statement of what has to
be decided . Exactly what needs
must be filled or what problem
must be solved by the decision?
This statement should be precise
enough to have a limiting effect;
members should know what they are
not talking about*

Exanple: Vague— "He want to
solve the problem of school
closings." (This may include
discussion of city government
policies ? citizens 1 attitudes
about property taxes, emigra-
tion of young families to the
suburbs 7 etc.)

Specific— "Today we have
to think of a way to raise
funds to keep Albion Middle
School open next year."

Background information is provided
by the person who introduced the
topic and by other group members who
have information* As the discussion
progresses, other relevant informa-
tion is added whenever needed.

GROUP DISCUSSION:
BUILDING UNITED JUDGMENT

tr~.

An individual introduces an idea for
disc ussion . This idea may be an
opinion, a definition of the problem,
a suggestion for an approach to the
problem, or a proposal for a decision.

Another individual responds to that
idea . The second speaker's statement
iT~a" combination of her or his own
opinion and that of the previous
speaker. It includes a response to
the first speaker's idea and her or
his own thoughts as they have been
influenced by the previous statement.

C A J-M- r* person devel ops the ideas
further . Her or his contribution is
different than it would have been if
the two previous speakers had not
spoken *

■

D other people beg in responding to

ft ar Ti er statements and offering their
views on the subject. Each contribu-
tion builds on previous statements
and yet is unique as different in-
dividuals express themselves. The
effect of such a discussion is that
the comments taken as a whole are
greater than the sum of them indi-
vidually: group members respond
to each other so each statement is
the unique contribution of an in-
dividual and at the same time is
influenced by previous speakers.

E ThiriT ipr the discussion the facilitator
'and other members are responsible for

1. Keeping the discussion on topic.
(If it is necessary to redefine
the topic, the shift should be
made explicit and all group
members should understand the
change . )

2- Providing clarification and re-
phrasing of complicated or con-
fusing discussion,

3, Summarizing underlying agreement
and differences in viewpoint.

*The power to create « . + depends on
a living synthesis of diverse elements-
A meeting controlled by an Individual
or by a pro gram seldom produces what
is not already there in that individu-
al or program. If, however, many in-
dividuals, each sensitive to the Light
of Truth, bring together their diversity
of tendencies and possibilities, some-
thing new may emerge more inclusive, and
hence more 'true* than any one point of
view. This is brought about, not by a
mechanical juxtaposition of different
opinions, but by a real fusion. One
may mix oxygen and hydrogen and obtain
nothing new* But apply a flase and
the new substance, water, is created*"

Howard Brlnton as quoted by INVERT

r*:

*K Identifying new issues . as they
arise,

5- Ensuring that all viewpoints are
heard and understood by the group
as a whole,

6. Identifying problems with the

group's process and attempting to
remedy them.

All group members share responsi-
bility for the group's process and
may perform any of the above func-
tions, (See Chapter ? y THE ROLE OF
THE GROUP FACILITATOR, for a more
thorough development of the skills
necessary to perform these activi-
ties. )

When it is apparent that most view-
points have been expressed, all new
information has been given, and/or
some part of the discussion begins
to be repeated, the facilitator or
someone else states the conclusion
toward which the group appears to
be moving*

Example: T1 It seems the group is
leaning towards writing a grant
to the Mott Foundation to fund
the school as an experimental
center for community education.
Does anyone object to this pro-
posal?"

When "testing for consensus, ,r ask
whether anyone has anything else
important to say. Central to con-
sensus is gathering all relevant
information, opinions and feelings
about the subject, so it is essen-
tial not to move forward until these
views have been expressed.

MAKING TEE DECISION

A. The group responds by agreement or
disagreement . Special care is taken
to make sure that any objections are
heard. The facilitator may ask if
there are objections, or if consen-
sus has been reached. In addition
to raising specific concerns, it is
legitimate for someone to say , "I
have no specific objections, but I
don't feel settled on the subject
yet , »

B, Concerns are discussed and the pro-
cess of developing agreement, or
"building united judgment," contin -
ues until a decision is endorsed by
the meeting as a whole . The deci-
sion that is reached may not com-
pletely satisfy everyone in the
group, but it must be one that all
group members are willing to live
with. If serious objections still
exist, then a decision is not made,

C- If a decision implies that an action
be taken , responsbilities are clari-
fied to ensure that the. action is
carried out. If a phone call must
be made, or a letter written, make
"sure that someone volunteers to do
it. In addition, some method should
be chosen to follow up on the deci-
sion- This may require reporting
back to the group when the task is

■

completed, writing down the outcome
and posting it, or putting the matter
on the agenda for discussion at the
next meeting. Record your decision
and implementation plan in the min-
utes for future reference* (See
"Recording and Implementing Deci-
sions" in Chapter 6 S STRUCTURING
YOUR MEETING. ) -

D. If the group cannot agree :

1. It is possible that the group
does not have enough information
to make a good decision. Some-
times a decision must be de-
ferred until more facts are
gathered, more discussion takes
place, or members have more
time to think about it. Fuller
understanding by each partici-
pant will increase the possir
bility of reaching consensus,

2. The group as a whole may decide
that it is more important to
reach a decision at this partic-
ular time than to make a decision
that meets the group's usual
levels of acceptability, " Some
members may feel that this is a
special circumstance where reach-
ing an immediate decision is so
important that they will go along
with a decision they would not
otherwise support. (This kind

of concession is sometimes made
by individuals for the sake of
the group, but a group should
never pressure someone into doing
so, or the result will not repre-
sent a true consensus decision, )

(See Chapter S s WHEN AGREEMENT CANNOT
BE REACHED, )

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

INVERTS materials

*Is alasost all decisions which carry over
between meetings, there is a great deal
of development of thinking, and some
crystallization of opinion, so that in
the next meeting there is an accounting
of Dew thoughts, opinions, and ideas,
The group is often much closer to a
consensus at the beginning of the second
meeting than at the end of the first* 11

Glenn Bartoo, DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS

■

RULES FOR BUILDING UNITED JUDGMENT

1* Discuss the Isaues In the spirit of
consensus; calm, friendly gathering
of friends to determine truth, rath-
er than tense contest to see which
side can prevail,

2# When the meeting becomes tense, or
when people are not saying new
things, wait in silence*

3. If nothing comes out, or if the at-
mosphere is getting unfriendly and
pressured, n sxi spend Judgments-
agree to discuss the matter again
when the group can do so in a more
meaningful way.

Take no positive action on the mat-
ter as a group until it has been
satisfactorily resolved foT all
members of the group,

5. B e i*, to M «. P ™, s

patiently as often and as long aa It
takes to find that mutually accept-
able solution,

■

—from INVERT

■

t
t

];

I
1

■:■

■
-

BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE COMMUNITIES
Chapter h t "The Consensus Decision-
Making Process" by The Training/Action
Affinity Group

■

Chapter 3

Attitudes and Consensus

As experienced groups have learned , the
consensus process is susceptible to common
pitfalls. Some of these difficulties /
such as "burn-out" or misuse of time, stem
from poor application of the practical
techniques of consensus. We will suggest
some remedies for these problems in later
chapters. Sometimes, thought the process
falters because of the attitudes, values,
expectations or norms of behavior which
members bring with them into the group,
This chapter will focus on how the con-
sensus process is affected by the pre-
existing attitudes of group members.

Individuals growing up in this society-
are exposed to a variety of attitudes
and values from which to shape their
outlook on human relations and group
participation. Many of these common
attitudes can impede cooperative deci^
sion making. The first section below
will outline those attitudes that can
hamper the consensus process, The sec-
ond section will describe some attitudes
and values which support consensus.
We want to promote these latter ideas,
not only because they are essential to
effective group process, but because we
believe they are important to foster In
all areas of our lives.

ATTITUDES WHICH IMPEDE CONSENSUS

Competition

American society encourages competition,
teaching individuals to determine their
own worth in terms of how much better or
stronger than the next person they are,
In a group, competition is evidenced
when members try to achieve their own
goals at the expense of other members.
For example, there may be atteinpts to
win verbal battles by proving that one
person is right and another person is
wrong* Group members may try to capture
the limelight, withhold information,
manipulate others to accept their own
ideas, or they may try to choo;?e the
"winning side." Competition festers
both distrust and inequality as members

try to outdo each other in performance,
power and prestige. It leads to a focus
on the weaknesses rather than the
strengths of other members' contribu-
tions j to a search for points that can
be criticized rather than ideas to use or
learn from.

Lack of Interest in Others

Most people are trained to view work
performance and social responsibility
in a very individualistic way. They
tend to think a person's role in a group
meeting is to contribute his or her own
ideas, skills, experience and Insights

and that the responsibility ends there.
This perspective seriously affects mem-
bers 1 commitment to working out problems
and disagreements. It causes people to
put their personal needs ahead of the
needs of the group instead of struggling
through the often difficult process nec-
essary to reach a group resolution, or
instead of sharing the responsibility
for finding an answer to another mem-
ber's concern. Participants may only
feel involved to the extent of rep-
resenting their own personal needs.
Example: The majority of a group
may want to hold a meeting late on a
Monday night, Gail, who also wants to
meet at that time, does not consider
it her problem to deal with .the con-
cerns of llarian, a single mother who
must find a babysitter if she wishes
to come to the meeting-

Owning Ideas

M - r "

Another product of this culture's empha-
sis on individualism is the tendency to
think of the ideas put forth in a group
as the speaker's property. This attitude
not only results in speakers expecting
credit for their suggestions (and being
offended when they don't get it), but it
also means that speakers are personally
attached to their ideas and take any
criticisms or suggested changes as a

personal affront to themselves. Feel^
ings of ownership can lead group members
to argue defensively for their own ideas
because those ideas are their own, rather
than being open to improvements or to
other suggestions, :

Suppressing Feelings and Conflict

Social norms encourage people to express
motivations and desires in logical terms
rather than recognising and expressing
the feelings that are influencing them.

Example: Jean may argue that Jack
should not represent the group ab an
upcoming conference in New York be-
cause the group can't afford it.
Since this is accepted by the group ,
and by Jean herself, as a sound, spe-
* cific reason for her opposition to
Jack ! s trip, the entire discussion
may be carried out at a logical level
without any expression of feelings.
No one, not even Jean, may ever
realise that the real reason she is
arguing so energetically is that she
is angry and jealous. She thinks
Jack enjoys more than his share of
privileges in the group and gets to
take part in most of the exciting
activities. Since these feelings go
unrecognized and unexpressed, they
will continue to smolder and may be
the hidden motivation behind other
disputes that Jean masks in logical
argument .

In a similar manner, people are taught
that conflict is dangerous and socially
unacceptable. They learn to fear con-
flict, to suppress it as long as possible,
and if it does emerge, to smooth it over
quickly. A typical response to disagree-
ment is to try to resolve it quickly by
compromise. By reaching a settlement
at some point halfway between the two
"sides," participants may bring a rapid
end to the argument. But by neglecting
to explore and develop the concerns ex-
pressed, they may miss an opportunity to
discover innovative and more satisfactory
solutions to the conflict.

p. 14 (VALUES AND CONSENSUS)

is) Sj*%#^

SNN**V S

** * ****

a n nit-pick'\ in the same vein: "conflict shouldn't be a clash of one
personal interest against another, but a cooperative effort to bring out
all perspectives",. . I can live with that, but more compatibly if you
qualify that sentence by emphasizing that you are only talking about con-,
flict within groups that have met all the other criteria (trust, respect j
cooperation, etc.) Consensus not only "doesnH come easily" (p. 13) , it*
might not even be valid for it to come at all in some situations. Some
conflicts are win-lose situations, depending upon the way power is
structured.

WNV ^N V

*
I

c
<

1
I
1

ix^Y^&Lo-^yiq^

ts*-

<oc-x^J -..CjUzX. a „^Pu ward, JwET^ „60l ^u,. ^J^e^^<

.,.- .... ^'ul\=...so6^ -."'(^aM.V _._

td^t-a-~> cjyix^ sSf'tp-i — T^-<_ iL^x25^fl-^

. JJ

$1 n^5

■4°*

SaJL-

^r^&rLt^.

9 Z- &

~ ^A

^ -Kj^ c^XJJ^^ ^

ns r

V ^ N^W ^ ^ ^N V^ S VS VS V

Relying on Authority

Many people have learned to be passive
when facing issues, to rely on committees
of authorities or experts to do the
thinking and to make the decisions. On
a societal level, this has resulted in
individuals losing power over many im-
portant aspects of their lives — such as
environmental quality — to control by
government, industry, and scientific
experts.

Listening to the advice of experienced
people is an important tool in good
decision making, but in the consensus
process , this input must be balanced- by
the active involvement of all group mem- ^
bers. When some members are passive,
they deprive the active decision makers
of information from a variety of view-
points and give them power which could
be abused. Members who take a passive
role may later fail to take responsi-
bility for changing a bad decision.
Even when good decisions are made, mem-
bers who have not participated may not
understand or be willing to implement
the decisions. Consensus decision making
requires a high level of involvement and
responsibility from all participants.
Although this requires a lot of time and
energy from group members, the results
are worth the effort.

Social Prejudices Reflected in Group
Dynamics

Unfortunately, the perfect human society
hasn't evolved yet- Everyone has grown
up exposed to biases, assumptions and
prejudices that interfere with the equal
participation of all members in society.
In one way or another, all people are
influenced by these attitudes, even
though they may deplore them. People
generally are not encouraged to confront
these prejudices in themselves or others,
except when the discrimination is very
blatant, so members often continue to
reflect social problems in their groups
without realising it. This lack of
awareness can be seen in a group that
views dynamics between members as in-
dividual, personality issues without
recognizing the social attitudes that
underlie the problems.

Example: Sally refuses to give Abdul
a key to the office because she feels
that Abdul, as an individual, is un-
trustworthy. She doesn't realise that
this opinion arises from an unacknowl-
edged assumption that Arabs are un-
trustworthy/ Since the conflict is
viewed at the individual level, no one
recognises that social patterns are
influencing group dynamics.

All of the attitudes described so far in
this chapter can interfere with a group's
ability to function well. As a group
member, it is your responsibility to
recognise when your actions are influ-
enced by negative social training and to
change those actions. You can also sup-
port other members in their efforts to
recognise and change their assumptions.

WW MV AM

0£>^ 3'^

My preference would be a franework emphacisin^ the overall sjoal4
of combat Iw; oppression and achieving transformation with organizations!
serving and controlled by members as means* We need to be careful
about what organizations do to people but at the sa^e time acknowledge I
the severe constraints within which the strup^le exists in the U.S.
today. Do you all think consensus decision-making is more the choice
of well educated, upper middle class people and their organisations?
I say this as a. member of or^anizAfli^usins consensus. J -le need to
address this issue so as to interrupt classist patterns and in the
process learn from and v/ork with and understand the backgrounds,
needs and preferences of indviduals and groups from other areas
of the society.

ATTITUDES THAT SUPPORT CONSENSUS

This section will focus on the assump-
tions , values and norms of behavior that
are needed for a group to make consensus
work well* We describe them not just/
because they contribute to a particular
type of decision making, but because we
believe they could be an asset to society^
in general and to interpersonal rela-
tionships as well. -

Cooperation

■

A group benefits when its members expect
each other to be cooperative rather than
competitive* In a cooperative group,
members perceive themselves as having
mutual goals* They share information
and resources and provide mutual support
and suggestions. Participants make
diverse contributions to the group ac-
cording to individual talents and
abilities. When a group works coopera-
tively, members tend to like and trust
each other. There is a high acceptance
of and appreciation for individual dif-
ferences, and a willingness, to see
issues from others 1 viewpoints. Where- '
as competition tries to make me a winner
and you a loser, cooperation tries to
make us both winners.

One outcome of working cooperatively is
that group members recognise that there
is not always a single "right" solution*
A group caught by an IT either~or" deci-
sion may actually face a false dilemma.

There are probably other, more creative
« options available , some of which may ,
respond to the needs and goals of all
members. The group's task is to work
together to discover which choice is
most acceptable to all members. When
members realize that no single choice
is "right," rendering all others "wrong,"
they may be more open to influence by
others 1 viewpoints.

Example: Kay may strongly believe
that the best location for the new
theater is on Parks ide Avenue, while
other group members have equally
strong opinions about other locations-
But once they all recognize that each
location has advantages and drawbacks,
they can find an acceptable, good
solution, without having to agree that
one is absolutely right and the others
wrong.

An Emphasis on Mutual Trust

If consensus is to work, group members
must strive for trust in one another.
When you trust the others in your group,
you will not conceal or distort informa-
tion and will not avoid stating facts,
ideas, conclusions and feelings that
might make you vulnerable to the others.
You won't be defensive about attempts by
other members to influence you, but will
be responsive to suggestions, even when
you don't agree. When you trust other
members, you can depend on them to abide
by agreements and to carry out tasks

competently. You can also trust that
others vill attend to and remember what
you say so you don't have to continually
repeat and defend your ideas.

Common Ownership of Ideas

An idea that develops in a group using
consensus is considered the property of
the entire group, not just of the in-
dividual who first articulated it. In
contrast to the competitive perspective
that ties ideas to individuals, group
"ownership" of ideas acknowledges that
new concepts are developed through the
process of members responding- to pre
vious contributions from other members.
What Debbie says is a combination of h&r
private store of information and insight
and the stimulation of others' input.
If different statements had been made
earlier, Debbie's contribution might be
different .

By considering ideas the property of the
entire group, no matter whose mouth they
come out of, all members can feel in-
volved in the development of a decision,
when someone criticizes a suggestion, he
or she criticizes the idea, not the per-
son who expressed it. Members are open
to modification of the ideas they have
suggested without being defensive, or
feeling personally attacked. In a sense,
an individual's ideas are gifts to the
group. Individuals deserve credit for
their contributions, but the group's ap-
preciation should not give individuals
disproportionate prestige or power.

Valuing Feelings

Feelings are an important component of
a eroup: they affect how members ^ter-
acfwSh eac/other and how they approach
decisicns that are being made. A group
that recognizes the importance of leel-
ings and includes expression of feelings
as an integral part of group interaction
will benefit by developing a clearer
understanding of its own process. By
discussing emotional as well as logical
factors in making decisions, the group
will also have a better chance of reach-
ing agreements that are satisfactory to

all.

Val uing Conflict

Conflict itself is neither good nor bad;
it signifies only that there is disagree-
ment. Conflict can be handled competi-
tively, such that one side "wins" or
"loses," or it can be handled coopera-
tively, so that the whole group benefits
from the exchange of opinions and the
process of working out a mutually satis-
fying resolution. Conflict shouldn't
be a clash of one personal interest
against another, but a cooperative
effort to bring out all perspectives.
Diverse viewpoints should be welcomed ■
as a means of becoming aware of the
strengths and weaknesses of all ideas so
a strong and workable solution can
emerge .

.■-"*>

^^^^^T^^T^ve^V^ag7a-ph about consensus ©6 an&
(5) On page 16, you ***%* p " ? al % hange , which I love,
instrument* for personal and social cna j , and

What undercuts the values ^consensus e|, and departments to

business is competition ™"* *f ^£i* Sports to) . Thats
please ^general' (eg ; "^ever everyon^ P f .^ ^

what prevents people from sn g vidualism , in my experience.

nurtures a defensive Jcma oi _ leader takes affirmative

It gets pretty bloody unless the leader ^K ^ t&kes

action to nurture the values ^hind^ .^ his or her own

guts because in a sense uic

power that way .

Valuing the Contributions of All Members

Every person has unique knowledge, per-
spectives, experiences and abilities*
No one can know in advance the value of
what an individual will contribute "at a
particular time. The contribution may
be a feeling of calmness or patience
which helps the group perform its task
more effectively. It may be a practical
solution to a vexing problem. It may be
a fresh perspective that comes from being
inexperinced and naive in a particular
area- In any case, what counts is
tapping the resources of the group as a
whole. In addition, by expecting and en-
couraging full participation from every
member , the group fosters in each person
a sense of competency and responsibility,
and the development of knowledge and the
ability to play an active role in diverse
situations. This broad range of partici-
pation cannot happen in a group atmos-
phere where individuals feel inferior to
or competitive with -One another, or where
some members' opinions are valued while
others 1 are ignored.

Making an Effort to Equalize Power

Members will enjoy their work together
and will try to contribute more if they
feel they each have an equal share in
decision making. This equality can't
occur if certain individuals have a
monopoly on the possession of informa-
tion, experience, communication skills,
or the respect of other group members.
A commitment to equalizing power means
that the group is alert to and confronts
situations where particular members
exert more or less influence than is
appropriate.

While striving toward equality of power
and influence, at times the consensus
group should give special respect to in-
formation from some members.

Example: A group is trying to es-
tablish an alternative school in the
community- Some group members have
had considerable experience working
in alternative schools elsewhere,
while other group members have no ex-

perience but are highly interested in
the project. The challenge facing
this group is to preserve the fresh
perspectives of inexperienced mem-
bers while paying special attention
to what can be learned from the oth-
ers T experiences .

It is important for groups to learn from
their history so new members don't simply
repeat mistakes or patterns that have
been problematic for the group in the
past. At the same time, such experien-
tial wisdom should not be allowed to
foreclose consideration of new ideas.
It is a difficult balance to maintain.

THE REWARDS

We have discussed the values necessary
for practicing consensus in the most
favorable conditions, But why do we
value consensus decision making? For
one thing, consensus is effective and
it produces quality decisions. In order
to be acceptable to the whole group, a
decision must satisfy stricter criteria
than one which only requires the ap-
proval of a majority of the group. The
decision is likely to be the best of
many options that were considered rather
than just the favorite of two.

A consensus decision is also "Jf**^ £
V^mented well. The high level of par

fion'Su retain members *******
it better and being *°re ^itte* t *
than if consensus had not been used.

Consensus is also an instrument for
personal and social change. In using
consensus, group members pract ^e values
and learn skills which foster better re

lationships on both ^ te ^ ers f a ^ d that
community levels. Consensus demands that
members be more caring responsible and
fair with each other. It provides a
Sructure In which these qualities are
legitimate and necessary. And it ° Iie ^
^opportunity to help each other develop
appropriate attitudes and skills for
expressing these values.

We have painted here a glowing Pj ct ™ f
we uivB Fa . , t -u as been to point

consensus. Our otgecwidf ^ *\

out the ideals from.which-an interest in
consensus decision making grows Learn-
m to understand the™ lues benm^he
process is an important s^ep -ui
to work with consensus. The real strug
gle, tbough, comes in learning to ex-
£ess those values in your behavior In
the following chapters, we will try to

^^-Hr^l idea of how con-
give you a . f ^^fdescribe specific
sensus works. We J* 1 t these va iues
skills that can help you pu^
and ideals into practice. And we wii
describe specific structures that you can
adapt for your meetings whether you are
a small living cooperative or a coali
tion of professional agencies Keep n
mind that consensus decis i°* ®^!LfLe d

to meet new challenges, me xu
difficult to reach, but we think the
effort produces results which are well
worth while.

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS by Glenn Bartoo

^VERT'S materials (especially "0k6*t Games
to Illustrate Some Attitudes in
"Sharing Consensus")

■ Scut inte-^ ("9>V ^J^^^SSaT^ I &

-"*\

/ / A pract
I 1 there m

c k u„ w leads one to the related principle that
leal extension of the above leads one

- »miilizint power ^rhin the group . It makes
there mast be * rnmmlttTafi.it to eg^alizinE^g^g

ftD«3 equality to all group member* if there 1. no attempt

little sense to -i ^_

„.= „f eoual veifiht. Power in a group «""« "^^—Iffy/
to nake everyone's resources oi equal we s - — T

™ e rJ=nce and communication skills. A willin S -
possession o£ information, experience.

j X~ provide the opportunity for those with
ness to share information and/to provide tne o PP

a f^ u( .»^kills to acquire such is a necessary remedy,
less experience and fewc^sKiiis 4

^A^f* Mfl

. lf ^^a* **£**f * * ?

Chapter 4

Your Participation in the
Consensus Process'

Consensus requires a qualitatively dif-
ferent kind of participation from group
members than do other forms of decision
making. Two kinds of contribution are
basic to a good consensus process: the
clear presentation of your own ideas and
opinions, and your encouragement of
others 1 participation. In other words,
you have a responsibility not only for
contributing what you have to say, but
also for eliciting others' ideas, even
if they contradict your own. In a con-
sensus group, each individual shares the
responsibility of ensuring that all con-
tributions are effectively voiced and
heard.

YOUR CONTRIBUTION

A group needs a large shared pool of
information and opinions to make the
best decisions and to meet its goals.
In order to create that pool* each
person must provide what, she or he
knows about the topic. Give both
facts and opinions and attempt to
distinguish between the two. You can
recognize opinions by their hybrid
nature: they contain both objective
fact and subjective feeling. Express-
ing the feelings that are part of your
opinions helps others understand why
you support a particular decision.

Be clear and direct in explaining your
ideas, your reasons for them, and your
feelings about the issues. As long as
your comments remain focused on the
issue under discussion, you can offer
new information, facts, historical
parallels, appeals to group values, and
other forms of argument to convince or
persuade the group. Make an effort to
* be concise and relevant in what you say.
Conciseness makes it easy for others
to listen to you; long rambling mono-
logues tax others f attention and make
it difficult for them to understand
your viewpoint, in addition to wasting
group time.

Expressing confusion also has its place
in' group discussion. Sometimes members
cannot articulate their doubts about a
course of action because their intui-
tions are not yet completely formed or
because they are afraid of seeming fool-
ish. Statements such as, ?l I T m not sure
why, but this whole approach seems wrong
to me/ or "I just can't make sense of
this/ 1 can push a group on to clearer
reasoning. Uneasiness and intuitive
doubts are often the creative edge of
the decision-making process, signalling
a time when new lines of thought or new
perspectives may emerge.

Aim for a balance between being persua-
sive and being persuadable. After pre-
senting the best reasons which support
your ideas , try to understand others 1
perspectives. Don't feel as if you
must answer every objection to your
viewpoint. Doing so will prevent you
from paying close attention to what
other people say. If you are thinking
about counter arguments while others
are speaking, then you can't concen-
trate on understanding their ideas.
Each member should be open to the in-
fluence of new information and perspec-
tives. Remember, you are working
r together in a group to come to a
' mutually acceptable decision. Make
your best contribution to that deci-
sion and be responsive to the con-
tributions of others.

If you have listened with an open mind
to others 1 ideas, and still believe
that your views are right, be firm in
, your opinions* A group can put strong
' pressure on a minority to give in to
the majority opinion. Consensus offers
an alternative to majority rule by
ensuring that the outcome Is acceptable
to all participants. However you
shouldn't try to be a heroine or hero
and always hold out for every convic-
tion. If you don f t agree with the rest
of the group, you should ask yourself
if you can at least accept what the
group wants. If you have good reasons
for deciding you cannot, ask yourself
what the outcome of "blocking consensus"
will be. (See Chapter 5, WHEN AGREEMENT
CANNOT BE REACHED, for guidelines on
deciding when to block.)

YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
FOR OTHERS 1 PARTICIPATION

Tiying to encourage all members to make
full contributions and helping the group
make full use of these contributions Is
every member's responsibility. One way
to involve others is to actively seek
their taiowledge and opinions. Ask ques-
tions which encourage quiet members to
become involved. Try to clarify state-
ments when you don't understand their
meaning or the reasons behind them. You
may ask someone to give a fuller ex-
planation of a statement, or you may
rephrase something that has been said
and ask the speaker If your understand-
ing corresponds with her or his original
intent. (See Chapter ?, THE ROLE OF THE
GROUP FACILITATOR,, for a better explana-
tion of the techniques mentioned above.
See Chapter 11, TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP
BUILDING, for ideas about equalizing
■participation in meetings*)

When others are participating, try to
listen carefully to the facts and opin-
ions they present. An atmosphere of
trust has a strong impact on people's
f - willingness to participate. You can
bring about such an atmosphere by avoid-

lug quick judgments of others 1 contri-
butions. Show respect for others 1
ideas and reinforce their validity*
whether or not you are in agreement.
You might say, U I seem to see the issue
differently, "but I want to understand
your viewpoint. Could you say more
about your reasons?" Such comments
signal that you are tiying to listen
and understand, thus encouraging
others to participate. An atmosphere
of mutual respect leads to a more
fertile pool of ideas and a greater
probability that differences will be
successfully resolved. (See Chapter 11 ,
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING, for sug-
gestions on building group trust.)

You can also encourage other members'
greater involvement by having the group
adopt a problem- solving attitude. When
issues are viewed as a problem shared
by the whole group , then everyone ! s re-
sources are likely to be employed co-
operatively in the search for an
acceptable solution. This approach
contrasts with one which sets up two or
more sides in opposition to each other
and proceeds towards a decision where
one .side "wins" and the other "loses, rt
By focusing on working together to find
a solution to ir our tr problem, the par-
ticipants can address ideas rather than
personalities. Disputants express an
attitude that says "I don't agree with
that idea," rather than one that says,
"You are wrong, M Depersonalising dis-
agreements reduces defensiveness and
helps people listen to each other,

Here are some guidelines for taking a
problem-solving approach:

— Before proposing courses of action,
help the group develop a clear under-
standing of what goals the decision is
supposed to meet, what problems it is
supposed to solve, and what needs it is
supposed to answer. Know the resources
of the group. The issues at hand should
be thoroughly understood before you
start a search for possible solutions.

— Try not to become identified with
or attached to your ideas. When you
identify with your own suggestions, you
are more likely to become defensive
when they are criticized or changed.
On the other hand, if the group accepts
your ideas, there will be much more
commitment to them if all members share
a sense of ownership of the ideas.
Ideas are a product of human interchange
and rightfully belong to the group,

(See the section entitled, "Creative
Problem Solving, " in Chapter 10, CON-
FLICT AND PROBLEM SOLVING. )

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

INVERTS materials

JOINING TOGETHER by David and Frank
Johnson (especially questionnaires
for analysing your own behavior in
groups)

*■**

mm*m

n A friend of mine once said of a dis-
criminatory action - - . % thej had to
draw the line sosaewftere, and they drew
it right through ma, * ify fellow /group
Etembers/j I'm happy to say, were gen-
erally unwilling to draw lines through
real people, ■ #

"The reason is simply that there was a
general effort to rule fay consensus.
It's much simpler than it sounds really*
After a motion surfaces on which there
is general agreement in parliamentary
procedure, the work is usually over and
the item passes on a majority vote*
"Under consensus rule, this point be-
comes simply a mldetage. Objections
are asked for until they are all heard,
and a process of compromise begins,
continuing until everyone feels com-
fortable with the new decision, or ■
willing to live with it, without bit-
terness, for the general good. Its
effect is that the majority and minor-
ity bodies on any particular issue are
reminded of their responsibility to ,
the other *s needs and desires* The
will to be together as one loving
people, when expressed, has the power
to allov the majority to give up
happily some of what might have
seemed its right, and to permit the
minority to accept without bitterness
a ruling favorable to It out of pro-
portion with its numbers* ff

by D^ve Bra let

from "A Gay Clam at Smbvook u
tfffl, June 16 ft 23, 1977

i i.i* t AlA d amn book
anywhere_in_the^ whole B q x

"May we always have the patience to
listen and the courage to speak. "

— The Facilitation Committee

Federation of Ohio River Coopera-
tives,

4PB

TAGGING

Before you enter your thing into the dis-
cussion — your reaction > or similar experi-
ence, or whatever— try if it's at all
possible to introduce in a sentence what
your words aim to do - * * What each per-
son is doing with speech* -comparing, dis-
agreeing » connecting, trying to get lees
confused — can more easily be followed*
And the person speaking, in. order to tag
what she's saying, has to look taaide and
see where she is in relation to the dia- .
cussion — with it, against it> her own
experience and ideas excited by it, adrift
or whatever. So "there is a heightened
and shared awareness of what's going on*

^A^^^ ^A^^ ^

n the Introductory quote? generally quite good, and If you're going to quote/-
an't change the words. But the use of the word " compromise " is unfortunate.

at occurs in consensus is not ekhkpto compromise, k i.e. , the giving up
up of something you want, a something that is assumed to be fixed and un-
changeable, but a profoundly li subtly different event: reformulation, in
which what you started out want tog Itse lf changes . You do not lose
something of this fixed position, you change, see something better, im-
I prove your benefits in the contexts of the group exchange, the new infor-
mation, the longer better vision generated. The whole nature of con-
sensus is based on the dialectical view of reality-wptfprocess: emergent
truth, continuous self-development, and so forth. The whole nature of
compromise is based on the !Jffrartec "metaphysical" (I don't like the word
but that's the one they used) view: of static reality, every change being
somehow a loss t competition, and so forth. Xf^K M,itlv*^^l

;

**A

Chapter 5

When Agreement Cannot Be Reached

"Blocking" is one of the most contro-
versial and confusing aspects of con-
sensus decision making* The concept of
blocking evokes strong reactions in many
people, although there^ is little agree-
ment on what blocking is and is not.
This chapter starts with a definition
and explanation of blocking, offers some
practical suggestions for the individual
who is deciding whether to block, dis^
cusses alternatives to blocking, and
makes suggestions about the roles and
responsibilities of the dissenter and
the other group members in a blocking
situation. In addition, this chapter

"Blocking consensus" often carries
a negative connotation

includes two personal statements with
different perspectives on blocking and
a history of our writing group's strug-
gle to come to consensus on how to
present the role of blocking in this
book.

BACKGROUND

Group decision making requires balancing
the needs and wills of individuals with
the goals of the group as a whole. There
is always a tension in this balance.

■

On the one hand, this tension between the
group and the individuals can check the
possibility of tyranny by the majority,
a situation in which an individual or
minority's views are ignored- It can be
argued that blocking is the philosophi-
cal base of consensus since the Indi-
vidual's right to block a group decision
represents the respect and power afforded
to each person In a democratic group*

On the other hand, the tension between
the group and the individual can also
mitigate possible tyranny by the minori-
ty or excessive individualism, That is,
the balance can prevent individuals or
special interest blocks from overriding
the goals of the group. It can be ar-
gued that the individual's right to
block actually undermines the philoso-

Otffi HISTORY:
A CASE STUDY OF BLOCKING ISSUES

As or this writing, IV B early In March,
I960. We have been working on this book
for just two years* The group writing
process is a slov one, and not as steady
as we'd like* We work in fits and
starts, talking and writing* and going
off to write more, reviewing each oth-
er's pieces and re* working them, discuss-
ing thes again and reworking the ideas
and the form over again* There axe very
few ideas , chapters or sentences that
can be identified as mine, or Brian's,
or any individual's anyisore. We've
learned and integrated each other* a
perspectives on consensus through the
writing process* We've been building
a strong group through using a con-
sensus process in our writing work,

The single most difficult issue our
group has grappled with IS blocking.
We went round and round and could not
agree on the role of blocking in con-
sensus* To clarify her perspective,
Blaine wrote a one-and-a-half page
statement explaining why she thinks
blocking should not be allowed. While
the others of us in the group could
see her perspective and gained more
appreciation for the potential dangers
of blocking in groups, her stand on
blocking was simply not part of con-
sensus as we knew it* Cfael spoke most
insistently that the philosophical
underpinnings of concensus lie in the
individual's right to block*

We could agree to disagree among our-
selves, but what about this book? We
couldn't just leave out the role of
blocking. For awhile we thought we
could eliminate the word "blocking"
altogether. We'd have a short chapter
called "When Agreement Cannot Be
Beached,* 1 and edit the rest of the
book to eliminate use of the word
*blocking^

Continued . , .

phy and intent of the consensus process
by giving undue and unfair power to
individuals, instead of placing the
greatest power in the group as a whole.

The issue is raised: does the Indi-
vidual need to be protected from the
undue influence of the group? Or does
the group need protection from the un-
due influence of the individual? The
individual's right to block an other-
wise consensual decision is at the
center of this Issue,

The answers to this dilemma are differ-
ent for each person and arise from
unique sets of experiences. We are
including some personal statements
about the implications of blocking in
an attempt to present the issues as
completely as possible, as well as to
involve you in the process of examin-
ing the questions for yourself- The
story of our group's effort to hammer
out a shared perspective further illus-
trates the depth and extent of con-
troversy around blocking. (See the
section entitle d 3 "Our History: A Case
Study of the Blocking Is sue s, " boxed in
this chapter. )

A DEFINITION OF "BLOCKING"

To clarify what we mean by "blocking, "
we can start by saying what it is not.
It is Important to distinguish between
the power of an individual to disagree
with others in. the group, and the power
of an individual to block consensus.
The former is at the heart of the con-
sensus process. Sometimes a group
quickly and casually accepts a proposal
for a solution or action and is nearing
a decision when someone raises objec-
tions or brings in new information which
changes members' perspectives. When
this happens, it is the dissenter's re-
sponsibility to give all relevant infor-
mation, explain reasons clearly, and
present the information and opinions as
thoroughly as he or she can. It is the
responsibility of the others to listen,
to ask questions, and to seek out as
much relevant information as possible.

If the majority does not change its
opinion, the objector may attempt to
convince and persuade until he or she
believes his or her perspective has
been presented in a positive and con-
vincing way. Usually the reasoning
and information behind the opinion, if
they are sound and accurate, will get
people to consider other alternatives
or another approach to the issue. This
is not blocking consensus: it is
utilizing consensus, bringing to bear
all opinions and facts, including con-
flicting ones.

Blocking consensus, on the other hand,
occurs when one or a few individuals op-
poses an otherwise agreed-upon decision
that has been developed through full
group participation. After time and
energy have been invested in discussion,
debate, persuasion, careful listening,
impassioned argument, and other ex-
plorative and persuasive interaction,
after serious attempts to understand
the issues have resulted in agreement
by almost all of the group , then a
holdout can be called "blocking, "

•
This definition of blocking does not
apply to a situation in which there are
two large opposing factions, subgroups
with different perspectives or, as de-
scribed above, objections during the
course of early discussion. In these
situations, there is no consensus yet,
so consensus cannot be blocked. It is
only after the synthesizing process has
$ had a chance to take place that any
blocking of consensus can happen,

Tn short, blocking consensus occurs when
one or a few individuals preclude what
otherwise would be united judgment on
an issue which has evolved through the
consensus "synthesizing" process. Block-
ing is a statement of the great seri-
ousness of someone's objections to a
decision. In practical terms, it is a
strong indication that the group requires
more time to reach consensus. The group
as a whole is not ready to move ahead
because some individual members are not
yet represented in the group's decision*

We continued to work on this issue in
the group, though, Chel wrote a 're-
statement of Blaine's position in an
attempt to understand it and to find
areas of agreement, and she wrote out
her own views * too. We Bade another
decision, by consensus, to re- work the
blocking chapter (ve always called it
'The Blocking Chapter," whatever title
we had currently picked out for It) to
accommodate all the views, n A Dialogue
on Disagreement" would consist only of
a brief introductory explanation that
conflict over blocking is the currant
state of the art, and the rest of the
chapter would be boxed individual state-
ments representing" all the diverse
views. We as a group would present no
view and advocate no one perspective*

Then things got scaiy. Chel thought
long and hard and just about decided
that she had to leave the group over the
blocking issue. Her beliefs about the
importance of blocking to the concept
and functioning of consensus are very
deep. If the book did not present con-
sensus with blocking as an integral part
of itj the book was not representing
her vie*s closely enough for her to con-
tinue with the project. Meanwhile,
Elaine herself was nearing a similar
conclusion to leave the group. She
feared her divergent ideas were holding
up progress on a project that was start-
ing to feel like it vould take forever ■
even under the Eost harmonious of condi-
tions •

Brian and I gulped hard and calmly
(trembling in* our boots) worked at per-
suading Chel en6 Elaine to think about
it some more and try to find a creative
solution. We agreed to stay together.

Soon our solution emerged, Elaine went
away for a few weeks and returned with
a fresh perspective* She told the group
that her view of blocking now seeded to
her to be the minority posit ion , and
that Chel*s and the "mainstream" perspec*
tive represented the state of the ar t on

Continued * * -

■

blocking in consensus. She agreed that
the book should fairly present this in-
formation We vent back to our earliest
format decision to present the chapter
of tert along vith Elaine's personal
statement in a box* Perhaps she is pre-
senting the view that vill predominate

in a few years — What a acoopl

■
■

The next revision incorporated much of
our group discussion and many ideas from
a longer paper Elaine wrote clarifying
her perspective* The presentation of
potential problems vith blocking is in-
cluded in the text; only advocacy for
positions is set off In boxee* And we
think ve found the best of all possible
solutions' to our problem

— lonnie
March B t 1980

M ■

QUESTIONING TIME RESTRICTIONS

■

A group of activists were preparing for
a court trial. Under consideration was
a hotly debated proposal to subpoena
a particular government official. An im-
mediate decision seemed necessary since
those urging the group to call the offi-
cial wanted to allow this busy and impor-
tant bureaucrat time to arrange his
schedule.

■

But the group cculd not come to agree-
ment * Too much depended c& yet-unknown
inf oraation : the attitude of the judge,
the evidence and arguments of the prose-
cution, etc* Finally the group realized
that the time deadline was a false one.
It would have been nice to allow the
official advance warning 1 of the subpoena*
but it was not necessary. The subpoena
could he made later y if the group so de* *
aided, An immediate decision was not ■
essential after all*

DECIDING WHETHER TO BLOCK

The decision to block consensus is a
momentous one. If you as an individual
block a decision that the rest of the
group supports j you are saying that
you feel the decision is so seriously
wrong that you will not permit the
group to proceed on it. Your reason
may be on moral or practical grounds,
or based on personal feelings or on
the needs of group members or people
whom the group affects. It is impor-
tant not to take your power to block
consensus lightly. However, if after
careful consideration, you strongly
belive that the decision would be a
wrong one, then it is your responsi-
bility to block consensus.

As we have said above, you have a
responsibility to participate fully
in the discussion that develops the
decision. Blocking at the end of the
synthesizing process without such on-
going involvement is an abuse of the
power to block consensus, Another
basic responsibility is to consider the
needs of the whole group separately
from your own needs and opinions. The
group is more than the sum of its
parts; what is best for the group may
be different from what is best for the
group members individually.

When you are deciding whether to block
consensus, ask yourself the following
questions to assess the situation:

— What are your reasons for object-
ing? Why are they important to you?
Are you thinking about what is best for
the group? To what extent are you ob-
jecting because of something personal,
or a need to express your own power in
the group?

— Is there information the group
does not have that might change people T s
minds?

— Has the group fully discussed the
issues? Do people already know and
understand them? In other words, do

those who support the decision do so
on the basis of informed consideration?

—Have your objections been heard and
considered by the group already? Do you
need more assurance that your objections
are understood?

— What are the effects of delaying
the decision? Is it something that can
wait, or are there reasons why the group
must arrive at a conclusion soon?

— What kinds of pressure does the
group perceive itself to be under? Time?
Needs or feelings of certain people?
Forces from outside the group? Are
these legitimate pressures? Can they
be changed?

— How important is the decision?
Does it have far-reaching implications?
Is it a minor matter that you can let
go by, even though you don r t like it?

ALTERNATIVES TO BLOCKING

A careful assessment of what appears to
be a case of blocking may allow you to
re-frame the situation as lack of agree-
ment or lack of consensus- The group
can then continue to explore the issues
and work towards an acceptable solution
Even in a case where a decision is very
close and you still disagree, options
other than blocking do exist*

For instance , you may wsigh all the fac-
tors and decide it is better for the
group to go ahead with this decision
than to make no decision at all. You
might recognize that no better solution
is likely to be agreed on soon, so you
may decide to stand aside and let the
decision pass without your support.
In an extreme situation, you might
realise that significant differences
between your perspective and that of
the rest of the group mean that you
would prefer to leave the group and
seek another group of more like-minded
individuals .

COKSEHSOS IS CONSERVATIVE?

^In some ways, consensus decision making
is a highly conservative approach* It
is often a very slow way to move a group
toward making decisions ♦ For one thing,
no change from the existing situation
can be made unless all agree to that
change, So If a policy now exists, it
will remain in effect for as long as it
takes to reach consensus on another
.policy. If no decision is reached , no
action can be taken,"

— Lonnie

CONSENSUS IS BADICAL?

"This individualistic yet strongly
group- centered set of beliefs seems to
result in a continuing non- conformity
of the Society of Friends with the cul-
ture in which it exists* Fresh insights
get a hearing* Any individual can
Change the group if he (sic) can state
the reasons why the change would enhance
group goals. Tradition must be prag-
matically sound, or change will occur.
Thus a certain degree of radicalism is
maintained,"

— Glen Bartoo

DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS

mmt

n If people are using the process properly,
then there is no individual 'power* to
block the group — only an individual re-
sponsibility to express feelings honestly*
The power to block comes not from some
artificial set of rules, but from our
respect for each other and our ability
to accept reality. n

— frem TWTCPT

If you decide not to block a decision
that you do not support and you are not
questioning your commitment to the group ,
there are several ways to modify the
decision so your perspective is taken
into account. You can ask that your
reservations be recorded in the minutes.
You can request that the decision not
be considered a precedent that will in-
fluence future decisions. You can
choose not to be directly involved in
implementing the decision. In addition
to any or all of these measures, you can
ask that the subject be brought up again
at a future meeting so the issues in-
volved can be worked through by the
group. Ail group members share respon-
sibility for seeking such modifications
so the decision meets the needs of all
participants.

The suggestions above describe choices
other than blocking that an individual
may consider. There are .also organiza-
tional level alternatives to blocking.
Such options include specially developed
problem- solving processes, provisions to
decide by majority rule if the group
reaches an impasse , or some combination
of these and other approaches. Elaine's
personal statement, boxed in this chap-
ter, offers a rationale for developing
procedural alternatives to blocking.
(See Chapter 12 9 ADAPTATIONS OF THE CON-
SENSUS PROCESS,, for specific alterna-
tive techniques . )

WHEN A DECISION IS BLOCKED

When it does happen that a decision is
blocked, the decision-making process
does not simply stop. The group enters
a new phase and members may feel uncer-
tain about how to proceed, in addition
to whatever fears or anxieties they may
feel about the fact that blocking has
occurred, The individual who dissents
and the other group members have respon-
sibilities to each other that define
their continued work together.

The Dissenter's Responsibilities

If you block consensus, it is your re-
sponsibility to clearly explain your
reasons to the group. You should con-
tinue to communicate, express your own
beliefs, and listen to others. It is
important to remain open to being per-
suaded by what you hear. Sometimes you
may have a major objection that has not
been seriously considered by the other
group members. Once you are convinced
that the group understands your concern,
has considered it carefully, and still
wants to go ahead with the proposal, you
may be more willtag to stand aside and
let the decision pass. If you continue
to object to the decision, you should
actively work with the group to seek
alternatives ,

The Group's Responsibiliti es

If you support a decision that has been
blocked by one or a few individuals, it
is your responsibility to listen and
carefully consider the objections that
have been raised. It is easy for the
larger group to bring the weight of num-
bers to bear against a small group of
holdouts. Often those who block con-
sensus are made to feel guilty for slow-
ing down the process or causing diffi-
culty for the rest of the group. The
larger group may intimidate the minority
by making them the center of attention
and showering them with arguments about
why they are wrong. Blame and intimida-
tion, however unintentional, are unfair
and violate the principles of consensus.

Even when you don ! t agree with the objec-
tions of those who block, it is important
to treat them with respect. Your role
is not to judge whether another person's
objection is grounds for blocking con-
sensus. Respond to objections in a
thoughtful way that seeks greater un-
derstanding and creative solutions,
Don f t just listen with the goal of find-
ing a weak spot through which to attack
and defeat. Remember that an assumption
behind consensus is that everyone comes
to the process with a different but

I".

equally valid perspective on the "truth. "
Combining and integrating these differ-
ent perspectives can result in a com-
pletej holistic "answer" to a particular
situation*

If no decision can be reached, then the
group must delay resolution until more
information can be gathered, or until
members have time to reflect and gain
new insights. Any previous decision
on the matter remains in effect.

Example: Your group has had a long-
standing policy of allowing other
cooperatives in town to use the WATS
line in your office for long dis-
tance calls. If you cannot reach

consensus on a proposal to discon-
tinue this policy , then the policy
remains in effect until you do reach
consensus at some time in the future.

If there are serious problems with main-
taining the status quo until a decision
can be reached, the group might be able
to agree on an interim solution. In
the example above, you might agree that
you will continue the policy only for
those coops which have been consistent
in reimbursing you for their calls in
the past, until such time as consensus
can be reached on a new policy.

D2AUHG WITH SPECIPIC OBJECTIONS

There are three general methods for
trying' to meet an objection. A method
that is appropriate in one instance may
be inappropriate In another; so if try-
ing to meet an objection in one way
turns out to be futile, try another-
method. These three leethods are:

Try to get at the root of the objec-
tion. The objection gives the
u vhat n ; often bringing out the "why"
will lead to a way to meet the ob-
jection*

Example: John objects to meetings
being held in F&rofftovn, la bring-
ing out the roots-, it develops that
the objection is not to Faro ff town
itself , but to the long drive.
Further probing turns up that it is
not the time spent that is unac-
ceptable, but the driving Itself*
Sally, who lives near John, is agree-
able to driving John to and from
seet Ings .

The objection has been

™e f

<J *

2, Try to ssodlfy the idea under consid-
eration to incorporate the objection.

3* Find an entirely new direction.

Modified from materials by INVERT

■■*■*

■—

WHY BLOCKING CONSENSUS
SHOULD NOT B2 ALLOWED

I hold the view that the individual's
"right n to block an action underlines
the philosophy and intent of the consen-
sus process by giving undue power to
individuals instead of placing the
greatest power in the group as a whole*
This view is based on seven years of
study and of practice in consensus deci-
sion making.

In my view, the definition of blocking
as an act which an individual can con-

■-

^^^■^^™

eclously and rightfully choose rein-
forces the practice of individual
solutions to group problems* An ulti-
mate effect of blocking is that an
entire srroup can be obstructed from
action due to the vill of one person*
Allowing for and/or encouraging this
possibility produces conditions which
©ay lead to antl-deoocratic situations.
Three of these situations are occur-
rences all too coismonly seen in consen-
sus groups: tyranny by the minority, -
conflict avoidance, and giving more
power to already-powerful Individuals.

AMI

Continued

Minority Rule

■■ ■ *— -^ .

Wiea any group or individual is given
an ultimate power in a situatiion, they
will (and should) use that power when
they need it most* They are most likely
to use that power in situations which
are most threat en tog to their interests
— where they have the moat to lose*
Just as the practice of majority voting
makes it easy for the majority not to
listen to the minority on issues which
they feel strongly about and do not
need the minority to pass, the individu-
al's right to block (IBB) can easily
allow a condition of minority rule on
issues which are important to an indi-
vidual or small group. This minority
need not convince the rajority or the
rest of the group in order to bring in-
fluence to bear, but can merely object
and block the actions of the majority.
Giving individuals the right to block
encourages those in the minority to take
an individualistic approach, rather than
a collective approach to solving collec-
tive problems. It also allows for the
abuse of the "right, 11 since it is very
easy for individuals to use it to foster
their own individual interests at the
expense of the goals and needs of the
group as a whole.

The individual's right to block is in
effect giving the individual veto power
over the group. This veto power may not
be used often, but you can bet it will
be used at the most critical times— when
the issues are the hottest and the etakes
are the highest. These are the times
when, if allowed, individuals will resort
to individualistic problem-solving meth-
ods over working things out with the
group. There Is also a high likeli-
hood of. pushing for personal interests
at the expense of group goals.
■ ■

Conflict Avoidance

-■

Depending upon the nature of the group
and the issues at hand, 1KB may also
encourage conflict avoidance* IRB does
not have to be used overtly to effec-
tively block consensus. The threat of

blocking aione is enough , in many cases,
to influence the outcome of a decision*
I see this happening time and time
again in consensus groups — much more
often than the overt minority rule situ-
ation described above* A group , after
some experience with its members 1 opin-
ionSj may begin to anticipate what it
can reach consensus on and what will be
opossed by a person or email group. The
group falls into avoiding conflict, dif-
ficulty, or long drawn-out discussions
by not even considering those options
which it Imows will bring about objec-
tions by these people. Instead , the
group may opt for a more comfortable,
easiei>to-get compromise solution, or
the status quo — which may not be the
best decision—but which doesn't offend

^A^HH^B^^

■ "*■ I fc* ifi"

or threaten a particular subgroup or
individual.

Bolstering Poyerful Individuals

Another problem with IRB is that assert-
ive individuals and powerful interest
groups are the ones most likely to use
blocking. One of the strongest argu-
ments in favor of IfiB is that individu-
als who, under conditions of majority
rule, would not be listened to, are
listened to in consensus because they
have the power to block any group deci-
sion- In my experience working with
^consensus, I have not s^en a single
occurrence in which a non-assertive,
timid individual had the gall to block
an otherwise consensual decision of the
group. In all instances, the individu-
als who have used blocking either had
strong personalities, had powerful
positions within the group, or repre-
sented powerful interests outside the
group . Instead of serving to equalise
power among individuals within a group,
IRB gives more power to powerful in-
dividuals *

Summary

■

I think that an individual 1 © right to
block plays into our society's encourage-
meat and reinforcement of individualism
— that is, protecting our own personal
interests at the em«n** ^r ±h* int*r- —

Continued - * -

ests of others and the group as a uhole.
It can also contribute to conflict
avoidance by providing a disincentive
to the group to get into situations in
which blocking ie lively to occur* And
because non-poverful individuals will
rarely block an entire group's will,
ITS contributes to lessening their power
in relation to the more powerful members
who do have the confidence to block a
group 1 s actions.

As I see it, the group as a whole must
have, in the end, the final power over
any individual—not the other way
around — in order to foster working to-
gether in an environment which brings
about synthesis cf opinion and ulti- v
aately true consensus* In order that
consensus be a troly collective and co-
operative mode, at no tiae should the
group's power be subordinated to that
of one individual*

■

I believe that the entire perspective
on blocking should be changed from an
individual view to a group view. That
is, instead of blocking being viewed
as a conscious individual act baeed on
a justified right, it should be looked
upon as a sign that a group is not
reaching consensus. Blocking should
not be seen as a skill to be taught
and advocated to individuals __(e_.jr._»
when should an individual block, what

I I ■! ■ I ~ I I |

responsibilities come with blocking,
etc. }, but rather as a problem of the

n m m w

m m mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm i ml

group for which there must be group
skills to solve*

— Elfilrm

s. :

CHAPTER 12

Adaptions of the
Process for
Special Situations

"SLOCKING" IS THE HOST POWERFUL
REVOLUTIONARY TOOL WE HAVE

I believe that the right of an Individu-
al to "block* a decision endorsed by the
rest of the group is the cornerstone of
the consensus decision-making process*
It is what makes consensus different—
and better — than other forms of decision
making. It ie intimately connected with
the qualities of consensus groups: a
commitment to cooperate, to listen and
try to understand, to share responsibil-
ity, and to strive for what is best for
everyone concerned. And it is one of
the reasons that consensus usually pro-
duces better decisions.

Blocking Equalizes Power

The permission of every member , rather
than just the loudest, sx>st articulate,
or best known persons, is needed for a
decision to be made* Therefore it be-
comes the group's concern to listen and
respond to all participants and to take
their thinking into account. Not only
does this result in a nore eralirarian

Contirtued * * +

»o

group* but it also produces a more satis-
fied group in which every member has a
chance to feel included and important
in which responsibility is likely to be
more evenly distributed, and in which
members are more sensitive to each other
and feel more involved with each other*

Blocking Improves Decision Quality

Blocking may prevent a decision that
looks good on the surface from being
adopted too quickly, before problems
are recognised or before a better solu-
tion is discovered* Whan all members
have agreed to allow a decision, it is
more likely to have withstood scrutiny
from a variety of standpoints* If a
decision is allowed despite concerns
or doubts j those doubts are more likely
to have been discussed fully and the
group may be better prepared to deal
with potential problems.

This perspective is based on the as-
sumption that each individual has a
unique, but valid, perspective on the
"truth, fl In a trusting group* we be-
lieve that others' insights are as good
as our own, and that others will use
their understanding in a careful* dis-
interested way* When another person,
addressing, a problem openly and sin-
cerely, feels that he or she cannot
fllow a certain decision to be made,
then we can believe that the decision
is not adequate , or its time has not yet
come, A better decision can be found.

Blocking Hakes Us Try Harder

- " - ■ — ^ a

When a group has an "escape hatch 11 that
allows an easy way for making a diffi-
cult decision, there will be a tendency
to fall back on that alternative "this
time 11 more and more frequently, rather
than struggling to understand* agree*
search for solutions, and make the ef-
fort necessary to work through problems
conaensuaily* Knowing that a quick
method for making decisions is available

can result in a slackening oi' 'our win-
ingness to try. Even when there is a
strong commitment to working through
differences cooperatively, groups lean
towards expediency and will generally
find an excuse to take the easy way out.

When group members give each other the
right to block, though, thqy are making
a contract with themselves to listen,
care, struggle and to trust every other
member to do the same* It is a state-
ment of faith in the best of our abil-
ities--and it is a commitment to live
up to that best. This kind of commit-
ment can motivate groups and individuals
to learn better skills for communication
and problem solving, and to question and
change the values and attitudes that
affect our ability to work cooperatively.

Granted, only a small proportion of
groups have the necessary conditions to
effectively use "pure* consensus . (Such
groups are small, cohesive , and coopera-
tive. Their members are committed to
good process not only as a tool to
achieve immediate ends, but as a goal
in its own right since it is a vehicle
for making the personal and social
changes necessary for a more humani-
tarian world, ) But to watch such
groups at work, using consensus in a
skillful, creative, and mutually
supportive way, is beautiful* They
are an ideal— an achievable ideal —
for which to strive*

Two such groups I know of can each
recall only one Incident of blocking
by an individual during the last four
years* Blocking is rare because this
kind of group has learned to respond
to individuals' concerns during dis-
cussion* before reaching the point
where someone feels a need to block,
and because individuals put the group's
needs ahead of their own interests,
only blocking in an extreme case. "

^^.■HM

ta*_H^

^**

I believe these groups don't just allow
blocking because they have the group
norms and skills to get away vith it.
They have become such effective groups
becau se of the kind of cossit stent and
effort they sake when they allow in-
dividuals the right to block*

— Chel

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

DIVERT 's materials

BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE COMUNITIES^
tion entitled, "What If?" on pp.
by The Training/Action Affinity
Group . **

sec-
32-3,

BOW TO PROCEED
VBE8 BLOCKING HAS OCCURRED

It ifi the responsibility of the facili-
tator to insure that the Individual's
right to disagree is protected, The
facilitator has several options for do-
ing this depending upon the situation,

a) State again for the person(s)
what the facilitator seases the agree-
Ben t asong the rest of the group to be.
She/he then asks the one or two persons
who are disagreeing to state their spe-
cific objections. This is often help-
ful if there have been misunderstandings
an either part*

b) If the objections sees to be
reasonable, the facilitator can ask the
group to meet again in snsall groups to
consider the person T s ideas* The group
may also continue to meet aa a whole,
but unnecessary pressure is often re-
lieved by small group vork.

c) *If the objections seem to be in-
appropriate or off the track, the
facilitator can state as objectively

as possible that it is her/his sense
that the group has listened as veil as
it can, but the person's concerns are
not appropriate for this time*

d) Call for a break to defer the
decision, if possible — i.e., give
breathing and thinking space to dis-
senters* This could be as little as
five minutes or as uruch as hours or
days*

from BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE

CamSITIES
by The Training/ Act ion Affinity

Group of Movement for a New

Society

J 0+3

C #^\ ^

Contents:

Proposed

Additional

Sections:

Introduction *A

Values Inherent in Consensus

Problems with Consensus (in American Society)

Advantages of Consensus

Attitudes/Headset for the Practice of Consensus

A Step-by-Step Process for Doing Consensus

How to Participate in the Process

Attitudes About Conflict

Group Building

Methods for Dealing with Conflict
Methods for Dealing with Specific Problems that Arise
Special Adaptations of the Process (eg* Large Groups)
General Meeting Skills (Including Tips on Facilitation)

RE: Participation sections on Content and Process division:

1, Having little to say about content, and lots on process, may lead

superficial readers to make false assuipptions/conslusions about our

values and priorities.

2 W The division seems (to Crepps) more accurately labeled n l-focused M

and "other-focused 11 (content and process, respectively) Many points under

process are really about content. Maybe this sou Id be revised OR say

something about how hard it is to spparate content and process, and how

we really haven't done r t, , .

tUJ

lO K%J©,

'-<

•/^ 4*w

^tf^-A

■ < *- x .i *

(o"M*->. «-^

Chapter 6

Structuring Your Meeting

Consensus decision making necessarily
takes place in meetings— and to many
people meetings have a bad reputation
for being boring wastes of time. This
chapter is designed to- break "down and
demystify meetings so you can use them
as constructive tools for accomplishing
your work in an effective and satisfying
way. We will examine the phases that
meetings develop through, how to use
agendas, what goes into discussion, and
the vital details of making and record-
ing decisions and evaluating your meet-
ings. These techniques should be helpful
in structuring your meetings whether or
not your group uses consensus decision
making.

MEETING PHASES

Meetings generally progress through a
series of five phases. The phases can
be called "social interaction, " "orien-
tation/ 1 "structuring," " constructive
work," and "completion," Some groups
may find this five-phase model doesn't
fit their process, some may add or de-
lete a step, but it can be useful in
analysing 'your meetings for insight
about where you're going and for avoid-
ing potential problems. It can also
shed light on sections within a meet-
ing, such as a single agenda item, and
can be applied to group development over
a long period of time.

Socia l interaction

The first thing people usually do when
they come together is talk to each
other, "How's work? How's your house-
hold? How T s you? What T s in the works
on Community Project 9,999?" Don't ig-
nore the reality or importance of mem-
bers liking to be sociable with each
other. Allowing time for human inter-
action adds to the health of your meet-
ing and your group, If you don't take
time to make personal contact early in
the meeting , you will do it later, play-
ing and talking when you're supposed to
be doing work. Socialising is fine when
the group chooses to function this way,
but it is a serious problem when you
need concentrated effort • (Specific
suggestions for making the social inter-
action phase play a positive role in
your meetings^ instead of being a dis-
ruption^ can be found in Chapter 11 j
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING. See the
section entitled * "Encourage Social
Interaction. "}

Orientation

The orientation phase is the time to
settle down and consider the tasks ahead.
Usually an agenda is used to orient mem-
bers to the tasks. We consider agendas
such a useful tool that the entire next
section of this chapter is devoted to
them, «#■*

•

Structuring

"Die third phase , structuring, may be
especially important to new or short-
term groups. In this phase decisions
are made on how the meeting will func-
tion: Who will facilitate and record?
Who will introduce topics for discussion?
What Information will be relevant , and
how will it be presented? Deciding
which approaches to take and what in-
formation is germane to the topic will
determine who can participate or con-
tribute. Do you seek experts in your
group to guide you to your decision?
Do you require the opinions, experi-
ences, or feelings of every group member
to fully develop this decision?

The issue of power is Inherent in struc-
turing. The positions of facilitator
and recorder, of first speaker, pre-
senter, and devil T s advocate all carry
influence. Many groups rotate the in-
stituted positions- of facilitator and
recorder to spread the Influence fairly
and to share and build skills.

PROGRAMMING SOCIAL INTERACTION

You know you 1 re going to spend time on
the social interaction phase, so why
not plan for it? Perhaps some members
of your group get exasperated because
meetings consistently start late* (III
some groups you can arrive 1*5 minutes
late , . . and be just in time for the
start cf business,) To avoid this
problem, some groups set (and stick to)
tvo starting ti&es — one for socialising,
and one about 20-30 minutes later to
start the business meeting, Another
approach is to schedule a potiuck dinner
for the hour before a meeting- -but watch
out for the potentially deadening effect
of full stoasachs on brains and energy.
Another approach is to integrate social-
izing into the meeting by starting out
with a round robin excitement sharing
In which each person spends a fev min-
utes telling the rest of the group
what major events have occurred in their
lives since the last meeting.

Constructive Work

The constructive work phase constitutes
the hulk of the meeting, when informa-
tion is shared , ideas explored , and de-
cisions made. The section below called
"Doing Discussion" offers concrete ideas
on how to proceed with this productive
part of your meetings. The suggestions
focus on a cooperative approach to ac-
complishing your tasks. If the earlier
phases have not been adequately covered,
though, constructive work may be inter-
rupted when the group cycles back to
take care of unfinished development,
such as friendly chatting or agenda
clarification.

Completion

The completion phase may be short , but
it's vital, Seek completion at the end
of each agenda item by having one person,
often the recorder, restate the decision
and check the final wording with the
group. Reviewing the decision gives a
sense of closure, can be an encouraging
moment of group self-congratulation, and
can pave the way to the next agenda item.
When a decision has been a hard one to
make, group members may need time to re-
assure one another that it was a good
decision and that it feels good to be
through it, Tiying to push on to some-
thing new too quickly will only disrupt
the natural flow of the group T s process.

At the end of the meeting, you 1 11 also
need a time for closure, for planning
the next meeting, and for a brief evalu-
ation of the meeting or a short session
for criticism/self-criticism, (See the
section further down in this chapter
entitled j ^Evaluation. u )

USING AGENDAS

An agenda is a plan for your meeting, a
list of tasks to be addressed. For an
agenda to be a useful tool, each agenda
item should include these elements:

Hta

Mte

*Mta*

— The topic of discussion, stated
clearly.

— The action to be taken. Is this
item an announcement, a report, a dis-
cussion or a decision?

— The estimated time needed for the
item: 1, 15 or k$ minutes? (It is com-
mon to underestimate the amount of time
an item will require, so err on the side
of too much rather than too little time. )

--The name of the person responsible
for introducing the item*

Including all these points and making
the information available to all group
members not only helps you plan and
structure your meeting, but also has

democratizing effects on the group.
By knowing exactly what to expect, each
member has an equal information base
and an equal opportunity to influence
the course of the meeting. Agendas can
be duplicated so everyone has a copy,
or posted on a wall in writing large
enough for all to see.

Creating the A genda

There are many ways to form an agenda.
At CCR we use a page in our office log
book. When someone thinks of an item
to bring up at the next meeting, she
or he adds it to the agenda list. We
limit descriptions to short phrases,
especially for familiar types of issues
such as requests for workshops*

-*•«

SAMPLE AGENDA

IteiB.

Action

Time

Presenter

Review of last meeting T s minutes

New telephone rates: do we want
to start Eonitcring our office
calls?

Update on new members

Bad news from our funding agency:
it's tJUne to start worrying

Who can help clean out the storage
room and when?

BREAK

Bookkeeper 1 s quarterly report

Follow-up on last month's discus-
sion about raising our prices

Inservlce topics for next year:
Inservice Planning Committee
wants input

Setting our next meeting

Evaluation

10 n

Gail

Decision

Report

Discussion

Request

Report

Decision

Brainstorm

Decision

Discussion

15*'
10"

25 1>

5 11

10"

15"

30"

15"
3 ,!

15 !l

Bob

Carol and Al

Liz

Frank

Bob

Cindy

Louise

Facilitator

Workers at Nature's, a collective bakery
we know, write long explanations of each
subject on their meeting agenda, which
is posted immediately following the pre-
vious meeting. They have '"found they
need to close the agenda to new items
2k hours before each meeting so there's
time for eveiyone.to read and think about
the in formation beforehand. In contrastj
other groups prefer to form the agenda
at the beginning of each meeting, to
avoid fixing their expectations too
rigidly before they start*

It can be the facilitator's responsi-
bility, if she or he is chosen in ad-
vance of the meeting, to begin prepara-
tion of the agenda. This task involves
t reviewing old minutes for unfinished
items or topics that were deferred to
the next meeting, as well as noting cur-
rent topics that other members bring up.
If the group is geographically dis-
persed and has the funds, mail a tenta-
tive agenda about a week before the
meeting so members are prepared for
tasks they face*

At the Beginning of the Meeting

No matter how your agenda is developed,
r an agenda review should come early in
the meeting. Read through what you

have on the agenda already. Add other
items if necessary. Look over minutes
of the previous meeting for leftovers,
if this hasn't been done yet*

The agenda review is the time for
editing . First, ask if the suggested
time limits are realistic. Sometimes
the presenter of an item thinks it will
take only five minutes > but someone else
has additional information or a differ-
ent perspective which brings it up to
15 minutes. In other cases ? you may
find that two ten-minute items are
really one and the same, just phrased
differently. Check the length of the
meeting by adding up each item's time,
plus time for wrap-up, evaluation, and
setting the next meeting, Do you have
four hours of work to do in two and a
half? If so, you may have to priori-
tize Issues and select some to delay
until a future time. (If this is a
consistent problem^ see the section
below in this chapter entitled^
"Working Outside of the Meeting. ,r
This section suggests ways of reduc-
ing the amount of time spent making
decisions during meetings. )

Once you know what the meeting agenda
actually consists of, you must order
it. What comes first, how do you want
to end, and what about the in-between?
You can use various approaches to order-
ing the agenda* By placing crucial
items first you're sure to get to them
and can take advantage of fresh, crea-
tive energy at the beginning of the
meeting. You might want to T, warm up rt
with a few quick items first- Try sav-
ing some big items for later on to
maintain interest, especially if mem-
bers' interest tends to fade after the
"hot" items have been dealt with. You
can vary the pace by alternating long
items with several short items throughout
the meeting. Related issues can be
placed close together for continuity and
to save the time of constantly re-orient-
ing to new topics. On the other hand,
a lot of variety might keep you alert.

You might want to start with difficult,
divisive items and finish with more, uni-
fying and agreeable ones, or build trust
first by tackling them the other way
around , Whichever way you order the
agenda, if the whole group participates
in the ordering, the power and control
will be distributed among the group.
Participating in forming the agenda can
inspire greater commitment to the meet-
ing's process *

WORKING OUTSIDE OF THE MEETING

Groups may need to develop procedures
for editing or streamlining the kinds
of decisions they undertake in meetings*
A group may find decisions coming up
that are complex, amorphous, and hard
to approach in a short meeting period.
At other times, a meeting's agenda may
be full of picky little issues that
swamp the group with detail work.
Either way, you should consider whether
some issues can be addressed outside a
meeting of the whole group .

Set a special meeting , perhaps a brown
bag lunch, when interested people can
hash over an important issue . CCR has
held special meetings to discuss the
political/ideological issues that are
basic to all our work, but that we
rarely manage to get to in regular
business meetings.

Form a subgroup to do preliminary or
major work in a big area, to frame
issues, to list alternatives, to make
recommendations, or to make and act on
decisions in a certain realm ,

Example: When CCR was considering
changing our relationship to a fund
raising coalition we had participated
in for several years, a subgroup
mapped out a number of possible de-
cisions that could be made and brain-
stormed advantages and problems for
each decision. The subgroup's pre-
liminary outline was presented to the
larger group as a framework for mak-
ing the final decision.

Establish policies that outline the
boundaries of repeatedly- encountered
decisions. Policies serve as a memory
for the group and build fairness and
consistency into decision making. They
A save the tremendous time and energy it
would take to re-make the same basic
decision every time a similar issue
arises. Sometimes policies evolve or-
ganically through a summary of past
decisions about the issues. Record the
policies for easy reference,

«■
Example: CCR is frequently asked to
provide free services for other
groups. Our organization developed
criteria based on our values and
priorities that groups must meet to
qualify for free services. Evalu-
ating each request according to these
priorities automatically eliminates
some requests and minimises the fre-
quency and detail with which requests
are discussed at meetings.

Remember, a policy is a tool to help
f your group work better. Ho policy
should be so inflexible that the group
feels hobbled by it.

Delegate individuals to make certain
decisions. This can be done even if
your group operates by consensus. For
instance, if the group can't reach
agreement because members need more
information, a person might be dele-
gated to get the information and then
act on it, keeping in mind the thoughts
and feelings expressed by the rest of
the group. For minor details and areas
in which the group has set policies and
guidelines, individuals should be mak-
ing day-to-day decisions rather than
taking the whole group's time with
clearly routine matters.

If you know in advance that an impor-
tant issue will be coming up for discus-
sion, members can engage in a written
u dialogue . CCR has used a special note-
book we call our "Dialogues Log," One
or two individuals generate a list of
questions relevant to an issue and
write them in the log. Then other mem-

bers of the collective answer with their
thoughts and feelings about the ques-
tions and respond to other peopled
comments. By the time the subject
comes up in a meeting, groundwork has
been laid. Different arguments and
perspectives about the issue have been
identified and members T feelings have
been expressed.

DOING DISCUSSION

The actual body of your meeting is talk*
Transforming rambling, unfocused, shape-
less talk into directed, purposeful,
cooperative and creative discussion is
a matter of good intentions , structure
and skills. Your good intentions we
trust; the structure has been discussed
above; and the skills are described
below. (Also see Chapter 4, YOUR
PARTICIPATION IN THE CONSENSUS PROCESS,
Chapter 7, THE ROLE OF THE GROUP
FACILITATOR^ And Chapter 8 3 COMMUNICA-
TION SKILLS. )

Simple information sharing is imperative
if all members are to participate in de-
cision making. A discussion can start
with a review of why the particular
issue is important. Maybe a sister group
or associated organisation needs staffing
or financial help, A brief history of
the relationship between your groups
might be important background informa-
tion for newer members. If time is a
factor, members need to know that a
decision must be made quickly or not
at all.

Personal statements of concerns, thoughts
or feelings might be the appropriate way
to start a discussion. "I've narrowly
avoided three accidents this month be-
cause the truck 1 s steering is so
screwy. The brakes need major work and
it's eating gas like prices haven't gone
up since 1973* I want to consider in-
vesting in a new vehicle. "

A written proposal may be considered by
a meeting. You can start with general
reactions, then ask for clarification on

"specific points, and then deal with
members ' concerns , Keep in mind that
discussion will be more productive if
you seek positive suggestions to improve
the proposal, instead of just shooting
down its weaknesses.

The facilitator or other participants
should periodically advise the group of
the discussion's progress. "We've
been looking at alternatives to Paul's
suggestion for about 10 minutes now.
How much more time do we want to spend
on this? Are most of our ideas out at
this point?" This kind of reminder can
gently nudge a group along while still
being sensitive to members 1 feelings
and encouraging them to speak.

Eoual iziuE Participation

^ — ^

Meeting structures to equalize partic-
ipation are many and varied. Brain-
storming encourages creativity and
* detachment from one's own ideas by
stressing Quantity rather than quality
of ideas.' "in a brainstorm, group mem-
bers come up with as many responses to
a quest icn or problem as they can think
of. Members are free to take risks, to
toss out spontaneous (even absurd)
thoughts. Safety from criticism is
ensured because no evaluation of any-
one's ideas is allowed while the brain-
storm is in progress. In this judgment-
free atmosphere, creative thought is
nurtured, the full range of possibili-
ties is explored, and the likelihood of
discovering a new solution to a problem
is increased*

Another way to equalise participation
is silence . Taking a minute or two for
silence gives everyone a chance to think
about the issues and slows down interac-
' tion so that naturally quick thinkers
and talkers don't dominate the discus-
sion. Silence can be followed by a
round robin in which each person in
turn offers one idea or possible solu-
tion to a problem. The process contin-
ues, going around the group repeatedly,
until all ideas are stated and recorded.

Members who don T t have suggestions can
pass on one turn and still be included
if they think of something new for the
next round.

■ ■'.*.:■:'>;.

* ■■ * r ■*■»■.* -

^ The travelling chair can be used in
conjunction with a regular facilitator.
In this method, the person who has been
talking is responsible for calling on
the next participant. She or he speaks
and then calls on someone else who has
indicated a desire to contribute. This
process shares the responsibility and
power of recognizing speakers, distri-
butes the awareness of recognising
members who don T t usually talk much,
and generally increases participation,
commitment and involvement. The
facilitator can always step in, if
necessary ? to guide the process*

(A more in-depth discussion about equal-
izing participation can he found in the
section entitled "Share Responsibility "

in Chapter 11 , TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP
BUILDING. )

The Problem-Solving Approach

Most discussions can be seen in terms
of a problem that needs to be solved.
Principles of good problem solving can
help any decision-making effort. These
principles include:

1. Begin with a clear agreement in
the group about what needs the decision
is supposed to meet, and with a fully
shared understanding of the issues and
facts relevant to the subject*

2. Select criteria for an acceptable
course of action. ("It'll have to be
cheap and quick/' or "It'll bring in at
least $5,000 in three months and be re-
peatable for at least two more years,")

3. Generate a wide variety of pro-
posals — don T t stop at just two or three*
Delay in-depth discussion of any one
solution until you have an understanding
of what the range of possible actions
includes,

k. Evaluate and select a decision
according to the criteria developed
earlier.

Of course no group decision evolves as
methodically as this model suggests,
but keeping these principles in mind
can help you think clearly as your dis-
cussion progresses. If your group be-
comes bogged down in complexities, or
if discussion meanders far and wide,
you may want to use these steps to
organise your efforts. (See the
"Creative Problem Solving " section in
Chapter 10 A CONFLICT AND PROBLEM SOLV-
INGj for a more thorough explanation
of this technique, )

Techniques for Creative Thinking

A seminar on creativity led by Mike Heus
at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
developed the following four guidelines
for encouraging creative thinking in
groups. Try using these techniques to
reinforce the problem solving model and
the communication skills you already use
in your group discussions,

1. Spectrum listening : Instead of
listening to find fault, listen for
those aspects of an idea that you find
attractive. In responding, acknowledge
the positive to let the previous speaker
know that you appreciate her or his
contribution,

— I

'-s

■ L

^€ci5ion5

v^mv^^p

THE RECORDER'S RESPONSIBILITIES

■
■

— Note decision© made.

—Note cod teat of major discus sion

—List ideas from brainstorms, round
robins, etc, ■

— Note issues to return to at future
Metises.

— Record who took responsibility to
do what by when.

~~ If your style is to put more than
this into the notes , mark decisions,
responsibilities, and leftover items
for easy Identification at the next
useetlng. Underline in red, star In the
margin, or use other symbols.

•

—During discussion, read back de-
cisions after they are Bade to check for
accuracy in the notes and to mark clo-
sure on the Item.

— During discussion, read from per-
tinent parts of the notes as a device to
slaw down a runaway discussion or to
return the group's focus to a task*

■

— After the meeting, place minutes in
their proper (accessible, known) place>
or type, copy and distribute them*

■ —At the next meeting, read major
points as a review: decisions made,
issues deferred to the present meeting,
and reminders of assignments and respon-
sible ies, ^___

■*v

2. Hitchhiking : Identify the parts
of what you have heard that seem to
have potential and add your ideas to
it. Pick up on others 1 contributions,

3. Use associative or "linking",
thinking . Combine what others say with
your ideas (hitchhiking) and blend your
own and others' suggestions in new ways.
Put ideas together to develop "recipes"
of action.

If. Don T t quit after the first good
idea . Keep it in mind and continue the
search for more, Don't try to kill off
one idea so you can initiate your own-
instead acknowledge the first idea as
helpful and suggest putting it "on hold 11
while exploring even more ways to use
the resources at hand.

RE CORDING AND IMPLEMENTING DECISIONS

It's a shame to spend your good time
and energy making decisions that are
never implemented, or even remembered.
Write down and verify your decisions as
they are made. Assign individuals spe-
cific responsibilities for carrying out
the plans. Remind yourselves of your
decisions at the following meeting when
you review the previous session's min-
utes. And figure out implementation
plans that have built-in checks if you
need help in actually getting things
done*

Example: The Wisconsin Drug Clear-
inghouse staff decided on a set of
techniques to help cut down on time
spent in staff meetings. To check
on how well their techniques were
being implemented, they chose to
assign one person the responsibility
of bringing the matter up for review
in one month.

Nature r s Bakeiy, in Madison, Wisconsin,
has developed a system they call "Man-
agement by Commitment, " They keep an
office log in which are written all the
commitments that workers make to do dif-
ferent tasks. The log provides a quick
check for accountability*

A calendar can be used to keep track of
regular review periods for projects,
employees, or trial procedures. Post
new policies on bulletin boards or on
big sheets of paper in your office, and
then look at them occasionally. You
probably have other routines that your
group uses and that you can tie to in-
ternal accountability needs .

Be as specific as possible in your de-
cisions to make sure they will be car-
ried out as intended.

Example: If a group of three people
is assigned to research the options
of repairing an old vehicle versus
buying a new one, the group's assign-
ment should be clear: How much in-
formation should be gathered? How
should this material be presented to
the group (charts and columns for
easy comparison)? What date should
the report be ready? What other
factors should be .taken into account
(e.g., certain dealers might be out
of the question for practical or
political reasons, or someone might
have a reason to give another option
special attention)?

(See the nearby boxed section entitled^
,r The Recorder's Responsibilities* ")

The devil's advocate
represents the
unrepre sented

OTEER ROLES IN QEOUP MEETINGS

In addition to the roles of facilitator
and recorder, which most groups use in
some form, there are other roles that
some groups have formalized. Some or
these roles are subsets of the facili-
tator^ role, a way of breaking down the
responsibility and distributing it among
more people* Some are independent
roles. Like any formalized responsi-
bility in meetings, they should be ro-
tated so all members practice the skills
involved as well els sharing the respon-
sibility,

— The Time Keeper keeps an eye on a
clock or watch and reminds the group
when they are getting close to the time
limit on an agenda item,

-- The Pr ocess Watcher observes the

-^ — - -

group process and brings problems to the
attention of the group,

— The Vibes Watcher pays attention to
the emotional climate of the meeting and
communicates her or his observations to
the group when it seems necessary.
"Hidden agendas" and unsurfaced con-
flicts can often be spotted early when
someone is watching for them.

— The Devil's Advocate is designated
to represent the unrepresented position
in a discussion* If everyone agrees
that the store should be closed for two
weeks in August, for example, the dev-
il's advocate will try to think of rea-
sons why this might be a bad decision
and bring those reasons to the group's
attention.

■_

The ancient Persians used to make their
decisions twice: once when thgy were
sober and once when they were roaring
drunk* If the two decisions matched,
they assumed they were on the right
track*

^^~

EVALUATIONS

The evaluation is usually the final step
in a well-conducted meeting- It is the
time when the group takes a look at how
well the meeting went and how future
meetings can he improved* It may be
tempting to bypass or hurry through the
evaluation, especially if it has been a
long, hard meeting. But this can be a
serious mistake. Evaluations often
provide insight and understanding that
throw the business aspect of the meet-
ing into a new light.

Example: At a recent planning meet-
ing for a coalition of safe energy
groups, the group process was poor
but the meeting progressed and deci-
sions were made. As the meeting-
ended and members began to leave,
someone requested an evaluation *
Suddenly members began expressing
their frustration' with the meeting.
It became apparent that some people
had been so dissatisfied that they
had no intention of carrying out
the decisions the group had made:
they had stopped participating in
the decision making and just waited
for the meeting to end- Without an
evaluation, members would have left
with mistaken expectations of each
other, and without addressing and
trying to solve the coalition's
problems*

An evaluation can provide a needed out-
let for frustrations and criticisms
about how the group or indiviudal mem-
bers acted, and for concerns which
might have seemed out of place in the
more task-oriented parts of the agenda.
The evaluation is also an opportunity to
express positive thoughts, praise and
support for the group and individuals.
The group needs to think about what went
right as well as what should be improved.

Evaluations need not come only at the
end of a meeting. They can also occur
+-■ at any appropriate stopping place— before
a break, perhaps, or whenever the frus- ■
tration level is high.

■
An evaluation can be either formal or
informal, depending on the length and
nature of the meeting. A typical in-
formal evaluation might take 5 to 15
minutes, even more If important issues
arise, and it might consist of spontane-
ous comments on general feelings about
how the meeting went, members 1 reac-
tions to the facilitator t s performance,
why the time passed quickly or slowly,
and so forth. The more specific the
comments, the better, since they will
help suggest courses for the future.
Beware of re-opening agenda items,
though. This is the time to discuss
process, not business.

lHY ton^E^i

Evaluations can often correct
mistaken expectations.

Formal evaluations may be either verbal
or written, consisting of specific
questions to which everyone responds.
Some common evaluation questions are:
What went well and why? What could have
been improved and how? What specific
things do you think you gained out of
this session? In what ways was the
facilitator T s role helpful or inhibit-
ing?

Some groups write the comments on a
large piece of paper posted on the
wall, using three categories: posi-
tives , negatives, and suggested changes ,
An alternative set of categories is:
content, process and facilitation. The
structured approach is especially well
suited for long or complex meetings and
may provide useful feedback to the
facilitator or other persons who were
responsible for the meeting's agenda or
structure.

Xh© Leiota (Hatlv* Americans } make no Im-
portant decision* unlMS old anas, vomer* ,
aesi and children are present* Tradition-
ally! an old wossn would admonlah the
decision makers to take into acootmt the
effects of their actions for seven
generations into the future.

Examples of the kinds of comments that
might be made during an evaluation in-
clude: "Mary, I appreciated it when you
kept reminding us to get back on the
topic. We were really drifting onto
tangents and we needed your reminder
that it was important to make that deci-
sion today, » — "This is the first time
we have met around a table, I liked it.
I think it helped us stay focused," -.-
u We sure were lethargic tonight. I
think we were exhausted after a full
day's work. Maybe we shouldn't meet at
this time of day again." — "I was very
jittery and edgy tonight. I just want
you all to know that it was because I'm
very tired. It wasn't because of the
meeting or anybody here*"

Evaluations are a good way of bringing

significant problems to the surface ,
p giving the group a sense of control over
£ what is happening, and providing the

positive reinforcement that builds group

strength.

"Regarding the issue of closure, you
might want to emphasize the Importance
of a good system of record keeping as a
aethod of checks and balances within
groups using consensus* Accurate rec-
ords are essential if a group is to
effectively clarify misunderstandings,
respond to challenges* and/or revise
decisions previously consented to by
the group. Consensus does not iJEply
sloppy records-- in fact, it requires
very precise records if the process is
to function smoothly, ff

— Jia Struve

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCE

RESOURCE MANUAL FOR A LIVING REVOLUTION*
(especially Part II, "Working in
Groups") by Virginia Coover, et al.

^^ ^^***^^**A* A J

^^*^ w^ M >^ V

rv^t

wflV

Cr*wJL

.4-

Intro- -3
. , , .,.., ,___i*3&# ideas, values, experience and kno'>t£dgs* orCl conti^arflil.

■Aii pI I g-JiJ L^i t u*>.\ j! m flV^-ta^p^*n^ tn ratify tha fffrciffpii OU*y^'. ' U ,!) J ) p i nrTr h " * 'y*'^^ ^

K ^ghljF <fcy.-j!iitt#iii fn i-E -yH ng thai ; — y i c hVi i-nf i wr r n't gt i n - i dr rr ri on ri 'jinrr thqy m a y
not- know t he i-casofling b eh\id the de c isio n. o^+W^r^-J ^ps&ti. n\ U*j ^^^^JJ^

2) Autocratic with Foiling : A single person umakes the decision after asking
for the opinions of others involved. T - Ms ff elh u y alluw^ lOh l i J ^ U^pp O KyflUy =Sg~
^ includes the ideas of more peopled/id Lj^V^iyes jthe decision makerA feeling of
what people want^ t But the fe is stiM ncuopportunity for Interaction, for people to
think together, learn each other's needs */and perhaps develop new ideas out of the
ixcJiange* OvJ~&c^Mcx.4o tAJrw* J-bv^^ &y\<Lui^rr^ >Jl^j^;~ hk- A

&£*

i*iA,«

3} Minority Rule ; The decision/is ma^ie by a few people. They might be the
Board of Directors, a Steering Committee, oh other s-^ t the t o p pf th e hi e i a t diy * gg~S~
■fifa ' ^'y "j" h fl a committee representing a variety of positions In the^ group, teir
method fl^usually>^g*3g ^MlU^ii than deeisionsXbtf larger groups, since only a ,

few Individuals are involved A There is some opportunity for interaction herei
w*5^x The quality of the jfecision and its acceptaoll ity to the group may depend
on how well the viewpoints of different group .Tiember\ were represented by the
decision makers.

4) tiajorlty Rule/ The decision Is made by choosing a solution which is
acceptable to more brtan half of the entire group with eaoh person having equal

power (one person ,/one vote}. Variations may require a majority of two-thirds,

Z / three-fourths, etc. ft£^w(\decis1on-making methods describe^ so farcin thiL luuLI^ ,

4 tis*5=tfTTe- 1s the most "derrocratic" since/^t- r e quires th q suppoVt of t^-wo ai people .

T^phs decision /is more likely to be satisfactory to the group &s\a whole^ Hew-

c reative ar/i - apyr fr prlote the decision +S-WH1 depend 4* fg g fo on\the amount of inter

/ fJl K...^r^^toy^ -. ■Ab-

action the group had before vot1ngfW\C\f course the more discussion, the longer the

decisioii will take. Parliamentary Procedure or Roberts 1 Eules of Order are often

used to ^tfoviHg structure-** majority rule decision making.

Chapter 7

The Role of the Group Facilitator

WHAT IS A FACILITATOR?

To facilitate means "to make easy, "
The group facilitator's job is to make
it easier for the grpup to -do its work.
By providing non-directive leadership,
the facilitator helps the group arrive
at the understandings and decisions
that are its task. In a consensus group
the facilitator's focus is on the group
and its work. The role is one of assis-
tance and guidance, not of control.

A group needs facilitation in both the
content and the process of its work*
Content facilitation includes clarify^
ing confusing statements , identifying
themes or common threads in a discussion,
summarising and organizing the ideas
put forth, and "testing for consensus"
by expressing the decisions that appear
to emerge from the group process. These
functions focus on what the group is
talking about. Process functions , on
the other hand, relate to how the group
is working. They include making sure
everyone gets a chance to participate,
pointing out feelings that are inter-
fering with the group's work, and help-
ing members to express and deal with
their conflicts. Content and process
are both vital and basic elements to
achieving the group ! s purpose.

To guide a group well calls for careful
observation and attention. In addition
to listening closely to what people are
saying, the facilitator should watch
participants 1 faces and posture for non-
verbal cues on how the process is work-
ing. Eye contact can be used to ac-
knowledge people f s wishes to speak and
to let them know their ideas are being
heard. When facilitating, you must pay
full attention throughout the meeting in
an attempt to understand what is going
on.

The group facilitator should abstain
from participation in partisan discus-
sions. Good facilitation is hard work
and it is difficult, if not impossible,
to attend to the group's dynamics and
needs as well as to your personal wish
to urge a particular point. A little
distance is important for keeping the
whole picture in view and to guide the
group toward its goals.

SHARING FACILITATION

The facilitator's job is to be sure
that all the facilitation functions are
filled—but not necessarily to do it all
him or herself. All group members share
the responsibility and skills for
achieving the meeting 1 s purpose- When

the process becomes particularly diffi-
cult, you might say, 1r I T m having a hard
time now, I want help finding a common
thread, 11 or "Can someone summarize where
we are now? We've been all over the map
on this issue and I'm confused about how
to proceed. "

■

Another way to share facilitation is to
step out of the role for part of the
meeting when you want to be actively
involved in the topic being discussed.
It is the responsibility of both the
facilitator and the group to notice
when a different person should be
facilitating- "I have some strong
feelings about this subject and it's
hard to be objective, plus I want to
be able to participate * Will someone
else facilitate for now?" -- "Henry,
you're getting involved in this and no
one is really facilitating now. Is
there someone else who's not so con-
nected to this issue who can step in
and facilitate for awhile?"

■

Many groups use team facilitation as a
way to ease the responsibility on one
person and to allow beginners to gradu-
ally gain experience and confidence*
Effective team facilitation takes prac-
tice and good feedback from other mem-
bers. (Ideas about sharing the facili-
tator's functions are suggested in

Chapter 6, STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS*
in a box entitled , "Other Roles in
Group Meetings." Also see the section
"Formalized Process" in Chapter 12*
ADAPTATIONS OF THE PROCESS FOR SPECIAL
SITUATIONS. )

FACILITATIVE FUNCTIONS

The rest of this chapter describes spe-
cific functions and techniques a facili-
tator and all group members can use,
presented in a roughly chronological
order. Although some points relate
directly to content and others address
explicitly process aspects of a meet-
ing, we have not attempted to separate
content from process functions since
in practice there is often some overlap
between the two. Similarly, we have
not completely eliminated the overlap
among the functions themselves. Illus-
trations of one technique may also apply
to another.

There is no single "right 11 way to per-
form these functions in a meeting, and
no one person is ever so accomplished in
all of these skills that he or she can
perform them all at once. Different
people develop their own unique styles
of meeting facilitation and make differ-
ent kinds of contributions in the role.
By recognizing and appreciating this
fact, groups can encourage and help
their members to improve their facili-
tation skills while calling on the
special abilities that individuals have
when they are needed in special situa-
tions.

Example: Thea and Pete may be asked
to co-facilitate a difficult meeting
because Thea is veiy good at keeping
the group focused and moving towards
its goal, while Pete's best ability
is to sharpen conflict and help
people express their feelings. As a
team, they complement each other and
can learn from each other.

Whether you are acting in the role of
facilitator or not, the skills described
below can help you improve your contri-
bution in a meeting, *

Guiding the Agenda

The facilitator or another member may
begin the meeting, If the group cus-
tomarily begins with a short check- in
period j introductions to new attenders^
or some way of greeting each other
personally, that should be done first,
"Does anyone feel like starting the
check- in? ir

The first order of business is to intro-
duce the agenda , whether it is posted on
the wall, copied for everyone, or in the
facilitator's hands. The facilitator
should read the agenda items aloud, ask
for time assignments if they are not
already clear, and add, eliminate, and
set priorities among the items. The
agenda review orients the group to the
tasks at hand.

The facilitator should conduct the
agenda review quickly but thoroughly,
A clear summary may be appropriate.

■

Example: "We've got several short
items under five minutes each, plus
three fifteen-minute ones, plus the
big membership discussion that we
need at least an hour for, I sug-
gest that we get to as many of the
* shorties as we can in half an hour,
then do the membership thing, and
then do the three other items after
a break. Is that all right with
n everybody? OK, are there any short
ones that we absolutely have to get
to tonight, that we should start
off with?"

The facilitator in this case offers
direction, but the suggestions must be
affirmed or altered by the group.

As the meeting progresses, the facili-
tator keeps track of where the group is
on the planned agenda, monitors the
time, and gives this information to the
group periodically. (See "Using Agendas"
in Chapter 6 y STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS. ")

Keeping the Discussi on on Topic

Since most issues have many facets and
ramifications, and bring related topics
to participants 1 inquisitive minds, it
is common to get sidetracked or to go
into unnecessary, detail on an issue.
The facilitator should be aware of this
tendency and be ready to help the dis-
cussion get back on track. The impor-
tance of this function is a major reason
that the facilitator should remain
neutral and not participate in hot de-
bates.

The facilitator (or anyone) who notices
that the group discussion has shifted
from the original intent can interrupt
with comments like T1 I think we We
t wandered away from our focus," —
"How does what we're talking about here
relate to the logo design question we
started on?" — "These are good ideas
for a silks creen technique, but we 1 re
not ready for that until we decide on
the logo. Let's get back to that,"
At such times, the facilitator has the
responsibility to interrupt the dis-

cuss ion and even an individual. Be gen-
tle but finn, and use eye contact to
make a friendly connection with the
person you cut off.

Sometimes members get so involved in
an issue that they lose sight of the
group's goal for the discussion. For
example, Tina may want to share her
knowledge and excitement about com-
puter systems while the group only
needs information about one specific
concept. To avoid lost time and
frustration, it helps to have clearly
i defined goals for all discussions (to
explore, to decide s to design) and to
remind the group of these goals. Mem-
bers can often correct themselves if
given a gentle reminder.

Clarifying and Rephrasing

The facilitator may act as a translator
if members are not being well understood
This skill may be, called 'for if members
are talking past each other and not
* understanding each other's points* and
if feelings are rising as the miscom-
munication continues. One tool in such
situations is to rephrase the difficult
points.

Example: "I think Luan's point is
that the city funding simply may not
be available next year, aside from
other problems with that funding.
Have I understood you right, Luan?"

Be sure to check your interpretation
with the speaker for accuracy.

When things get muddled or confused,
1 re-define (or have someone else re-
define) the topic clearly.

Example: "It seems that we're talk-
ing about why we really want group
T-shirts and who'll pay for them,
and we have to consider these things
before we can get into the question
of who will do the art work."

Always get group acceptance of the
definition.

re-

Clarification can be helpful throughout
the course of group discussion. It can
improve group members 1 understanding
of individual opinions as well as of
the issues at hand, and it can save time
that might otherwise be lost to confused
and unnecessary interaction that Is
based on misunderstanding.

Equalizing Participation

■

The facilitator should be aware of who
is speaking repeatedly and who is not
speaking at all, in order to help equal-
ize members* participation. Some mem-
bers may speak more or less than others
for a variety of reasons: their inter-
est and involvement in the subject,
their knowledge of the issues, their
confidence in speaking in groups, their
self concept as affected by age, sex,
social class background, and so forth.
Try to be sensitive to the impact of
* members 1 personal histories on their
p art i cip at ion .

A variety of techniques are available
for facilitators to use in equalising
participation and encouraging full
involvement of all members in discus-
sions. The most direct approach is

**v*s«*

GENERAL COMMENTS ON EXAMPLES:

Find and use more examples with less tban opl tmal /perfect /pre in the sky
outcomes, (P„26/a-c is "in the clouds 11 )

Do the examples skew things about men's roles Tn groups? Joe thinks
perhaps men come across as "bad guys 11 more often than women, maybe more
often than is realistic.

to simply ask silent members if they
have anything to say and request over-
participating, dominating members to
refrain from speaking at times.

Example: "Excuse me, Jim, but
we've heard several of your thoughts
on this already, Carol hasn't spoken
yet and it looks like she's got
something to add, Carol?"

Or: "We've heard from many of the
men in the group. Let's hear from
the women , too."

Other techniques for equalizing partic-
ipation include structural procedures
such as round robins, brainstorms, etc.
(See the "Share Responsibility" section
in Chapter 11 > TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP
BUILDING. )

Pacing

A subtle but important function of the
facilitator is to pace the meeting. A
,f good group discussion moves at a com-
fortable tempo, neither too slowly so
the meeting drags and people get bored
and listless, nor too fast, leaving mem-
bers feeling anxious, confused or left
out. Pacing requires maintaining the
delicate balance between allowing enough
time for the group to discuss and under-
stand an issue adequately, and letting
the group get bogged down in too much
detail.

You can slow down the pace of a heated

* meeting by asking for a moment of si-
lence, or by suggesting, "This is moving
too fast for me. Let's slow it down a
bit," If a speedy discussion appears to
be ending too soon, you can say, "I
think we need to spend a little more

I time on this. Did some of the others
here have any comments or questions to
add? ,r

You can speed up the pace by advising

* the group of the time or requesting that
people move along, "We've spent fifteen
minutes on this now. How much time do
we want to give it?" Even sitting up
straighter and showing more energy in

■ J your body can have an effect.

Consensus takes time
and patience

Reformulating

One of the most important functions a
- facilitator can perform is called re-
formulating. This function goes a
step further than clarifying, and is
useful when many issues or points of
conflict evolve out of a discussion
on a single topic. The first step in
reformulation is to separate the
areas of agreement from the areas of
disagreement. Ask the group for ac-
A ceptance of what you perceive to be
an area of agreement. If it is accepted
and is part of the decision to be made,
.record it and set it aside* Then go on
to discuss the area of disagreement, and
do the same until consensus is reached.

Example: Susan requested that CCR
allow her to spend about $50 to pur-
chase layout materials for our news-
letter production. After a fairly
detailed discussion we found, by
separating the issues, that we were
in agreement about everything except
one item. Roger thought we could
build a layout board ourselves easily
and more cheaply. But by excluding
this item from the discussion, we
were able to reach agreement that
Susan could purchase the other ma-
terials,

In the course of seemingly endless
debate, the process of pointing out
areas of agreement can remind members
of their common ideas and can bring
people together even in the face of
intense disagreement on other matters.
Clarifying the areas of disagreement
sharpens the focus of group discussion.
It helps members know what the real
issues are and what particular problems
have to be solved.

k
Another function of reformulation is to
identify new issues as they arise and
bring them to the group's attention.
Whenever a new issue is raised, the
group should consider what to do with
it- If it is more important and funda-
mental than the issue being discussed
originally, perhaps it should take
precedence and be addressed first. It
may belong further down on the present
agenda, or it could just be dropped,
if unimportant. The facilitator might
ask, "Can we put this on the agenda for
the next meeting?" Or you might sug-
gest, "It r s clear to me that we must
address our basic goals before continu-
ing with the original discussion, 1T
Or, "I think we should come back to
this later, 0K? ,!

Example: During an agency staff
meeting, Sara requested a two-week
vacation during the next month, The
tense and difficult discussion in
response to her request brought out
a separate problem, Vacation time
policy was unclear, other staff did
not request as much time away as
Sara, and there were strong feelings
of resentment, The issue of Sara's
vacation request was reformulated as
a problem of vague and uncertain ex-
pectations among the staff. The
group decided to give Sara her vaca-
tion, but to address the need to
develop a policy about vacation
time- They also decided to begin a
policy book to help standardise work-
related expectations among the staff

A CASE OF REFOBMOTJITICW

A few years ago at CCR we found our-
selves with 17 members, after being
accustomed to a size of nine to id* m
decided to address the problem o sue.
Soon we vere expressing many feelings p
about the group, our access to one
another, the way work was being done,
and our roles and goala for the group.
Eventually ve reformulated our problem
as one of structure, not of size. Are
ue agreed that although we want to keep
our present membership, we 1 re not satis-
fied with how the group is working and
therefore we need to change parts of
our structure to fit the larger group
Size?" Size was where ve started, but
we found the solution to our problem
alon^ a different dimension.

Identifying Interpersonal Communication
Problems , p

Be avare of the quality of communication
between members. If you perceive, for
example, that one member is not listen-
ing to another member's opinion, which
in turn is contributing to difficulty
in achieving consensus, point this out.
"Jan, please listen to Elaine. I don't
think you're getting her point," You
may also help by rephrasing a thought,
or asking a person to rephrase their
previous statements. Then ask whether
others understood the restatement, or
have any questions. "Kay, I think that
#is an important issue. Can you say that
again, in another way, to make sure
everyone is clear on the point?" Having
speakers rephrase each other's positions
is another quick way to check for under-
standing* "Jon, can you say what you
^understand Lou to be saying - - * Lou,
'"can you say back what you hear?" If you
recognise that a problem exists, but do
not have immediate solutions, ask the
group for help. "Can someone help Jon
and Lou see what the other is saying?"
(See Chapter 8, COMMUNICATION SKILLS*
for more suggestions*)

■

Summarizing

— "v

The direction and pace of a meeting are
helped by the occasional interjection of
summarizing statements from the facili-
tator or other group members. Summaries
help bring issues into perspective; they
allow the group to see a direction to
the discussion, to re focus the discus-
sion on the topic, or to test how close
to decision they really are. A summary
might be: "So, I hear us saying that we
support the idea of staying open till
9:00 p.m. on Wednesdays, and we still
have to deal with Jeff and Karla's con-
cerns about phone coverage."

Summarising also helps to pace or move
a meeting along. Good summaries can
often help members realize they have
* actually reached agreement in a discus-
sion that seemed complicated and un-
re solvable. Of course, any summary
might be incorrect or misplaced in
emphasis, in which case the group should
object and correct the summary statement.

Aiding the Group's Emotional Climate

The facilitator should be conscious of
the emotional atmosphere of the group.
Do members seem listless and depressed?
Is excitement high but unfocused , per-
haps spilling over into unproductive
highjinks? Just keeping track of the
group's mood is important, but you can
also use the facilitation role to make
positive and constructive changes in the
atmosphere. Good pacing is one way of

maintaining a positive group atmosphere.
Other possibilities include a break
when members are restless, a quick
energizing activity when they can't
concentrate anymore, or a moment of si-
lence when an argument is so heated that
participants aren't listening to one
another, (See Chapter 9> WORKING WITH
EMOTIONS j for more general discussion
on this topic. Also see the section^
"Encourage Social Interaction^ " in
Chapter 11, TECHNIQUES FOE GROUP BUILD-
ING J

In difficult situations, it can be help-
ful to remind members of what the con-
sensus process requires — qualities such
as active listening, being open to in-
fluence by others, or focusing on the
problem instead of on personalities.
Such a comment can provide guidance and
perspective and can re-orient the mem-
bers to the group's goals.

Example: "People, this discussion
is hard, but I think we're doing
pretty well at listening to one
another. Let's remain clear that
the problem is what to do about the
law suit, not whether Johnny or
Claire has a better approach*"

A reminder of just what needs to be ac-
complished and what the group has in
common may pull people out of their
negative feelings or their attachment
to their own ideas and back to con-
structive work*

vw w^v w ww y ww v y w ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^^^^^^^

Identifying Individual Emotions as They
Arise

When individual emotions interfere with
the group's dec is ion -making process,
it's often useful to take time to iden-

i tify and respond to them. If she looks
like she is about to cry, you could say,
"Debby, you look upset about what Dan
said. Do you want to talk about it?"
Use your judgment and intuition in

\ choosing who, when, and how much to
delve into individual's emotions. Is
this feeling an important one to con-
cern the group with? Does it greatly
affect the group's dynamics or the
' group's understanding of an issue, or
the reaching of consensus? Does the
member probably need recognition and
a response, or would he or she dislike
being made the center of attention?
(Refer to Chapter 9, WORKING WITH
EMOTIONS 3 for further discussion of
the role of emotions in group process. )

Conflict Manage ment

Conflict and disagreement are a natural,
necessary, and potentially creative
part of group interaction. Disagree-
ment and criticism, though, should al-
ways be focused on ideas, issues and
behaviors, not on members 1 personhood.
No one should ever be personally at-
* tacked. In new groups, the facilitator
should state this as a guideline from
the start. When it happens, the facili-
tator should Interrupt the attack and
help the people re- focus on the issues.

Sometimes the absence of visible con-
flict among group members can be an
even greater problem, especially if
this is a pattern of interaction within
the group. Many groups perceive lack
of conflict as an indication of agree-
ment or good meeting process. "Nice-
ness," though, can prevent real disa-
greement from being expressed, leaving
it to fester under the surface. If
you think that conflict is being sup-
pressed, try to bring it out, "I
sense that we're not addressing all
the issues," — "In my experience,
„.it is unusual to find total agreement
on a subject as important as this, I
suspect there's more here than people
are saying so far,"

Identify what you perceive to be disa-
- greement, or ask questions to find out
whether people do agree. Raise or delve
into points which may bring out the
disagreement, If the tension is high
but people aren't talking, a simple,
"What's going on here?" might open
things up, Try these tactics when you
suspect the group is suppressing an
important issue, but don't chase con-
flict for its own sake.

Once conflict is out in the open, try
u to help members see all the perspec-
tives on the issue. Using a "round
robin" gives everyone a chance to
speak without fearing argumentative
response. To help people see dif-
ferent perspectives, you might ask
someone to play devil's advocate, or
suggest that individuals reverse roles
r and argue the opinions opposite to
their own. (See Chapter 10, CONFLICT
AND PROBLEM SOLVING^ for more about
structural approaches to conflict.
See Chapter 8 y COMMUNICATION SKILLS,
for more about improving communication
when the risks of misunderstanding are
high, )

Testing for Agreement

A function that is closely related to
summarising j but more specific and
focused, is testing for agreement,
When you think that agreement may be
close, clearly ask the group if they
do, in fact, agree. Ask, "Does every-
one agree that ...?"-- "My sense
is that we have agreement in . , , T1
— "Are there any objections to the
proposal that . . - ? w When you test
for agreement, do so in a tentative
way that leaves room for input, cor-
rection and disagreement as well as
for affirmation. And be sure to fully
■ state the proposal that you are test-
ing. Don't assume that everyone knows
what it is because Jack explained it
three minutes ago.

Soliciting Feedback

Getting feedback is fundamental to
everything the facilitator does. Al-
though you are responsible for keeping
the direction and focus of the discus-
sion in perspective, and are active in
guiding that direction and focus, the
direction itself is always received
from the group , As facilitator, you
speak for the group and need endorse-
ment for doing so.

As facilitator, you should regularly
ask for acceptance x feedback, agreement

* or disagreement on your rephrasing,
clarification, redefinition, summary
and reformulation statements, and
finally on your reflection of the "sense
of the meeting." We T re all human and
there's no such thing as true objec-
tivity. Despite the best efforts, you
could subtly bend things in the direc-
tion of your own opinions, or you might
simply misjudge the sense of the group.
It f s important for the group to reject
such statements if they're incorrect.

It is extremely valuable to set a tone

* in the group of openness, with the ex-
pectation that the group monitors the
facilitator. Let people know that it

* is their responsibility to disagree with

you, "I'm going to call * em as I see
'em, so if you see things differently,
please say so right away. My interpre-
tation isn't necessarily right-" This
tone setting is ideal, if the group can
follow through with it, because it can
be deadly boring for the facilitator
to be constantly asking for group
approval for his or her interpretations,
Find a balance between an overly confi-
dent, cavalier approach and an uncer-
tain, wimpy one.

Decision Identification and Implement a -

■ — i i *

tion

Once a decision is made, the facilitator
should make sure that everyone under-
stands what it is and what it is not.
Make sure it gets recorded. If there is
'any possibility of doubt, have the note
taker read it back to the group to en-
sure clarity. Also make sure the group
decides how the decision will be car-
ried out. Who will take responsibility
to see that it is done? By when will it
be done? What are the criteria for
knowing it has been done? What kind of
review or follow-up is necessary and
when will this happen? (See the section
entitled, "Recording and Implementing
Decisions, " in Chapter 6, STRUCTURING
YOUR MEETINGS. )

■■■

'■

COMPONENTS OF DECISIONS

—What exactly is the decision?

— Kho is going to do it?

— *fa & t information and/or materi-
als do they need to do it?

—By when will it be done?

— How will the group know it has
been done?

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

A MANUAL FOR GROUP FACILITATORS by Brian
Auvine, et al.

"Leadership for Change" by Bruce Kokopeli
and George Lakey

"Meeting Facilitation: The No-Magic
Method" by Berit Lakey

+i*^i

C»-*v-^<PNrt

* t ^ f *-J *~- Uy'~i— ** •**

-i* -* *- j- •

i*^, Oo^i ^1

yvA,

1 sr«ceft ;
-J> t*i 4H<* W/*. ^* d S*.cct*f +^y J £»

4 dNW4 tW^-i *«n l 3 * M ~ " Ut< ^ " H ^

°« f™ =3\\\.

HE*

IAV

6KJt. I H*"

T-J5xT=

^^^^ Sf'il^jV

4r St^f«t,

viLi^r?::::: Here it uiittiizvii

Da^in typurlter! Cven the celebrationary boot is screwed n^-fj irorklnf on
the edit in* was cost therapeutic— ^ept *e fro-n really crashing out her*, Wish
I cauM be there for the layout too (I'd bo^ed to hitch a ride o«t vdth t*ie guy
next door irbose wife is no^ in :!adiaon— but she's coming HFR3 in Feb insceas ^^) *
I am nost excited to think it nay soon be over (I know, 1 sound like all the
nostra announcements^)--) Aiyhow, L* theee's any additional work to do, I
/unfortuiiatelvykiea have the tiae to do it,

!!ope all is ftoins veil with all of you. I miss you all terribly.

Chapter 8

Communication Skills

^
v

i 1

■

Communication skills are vital in any
group that uses consensus decision making
To use consensus 7 participants must not
only be able to impart information ef-
fectively, but must also be able to un-
der stand each othe r when their opinions,
values, '^or feelings differ. Communica-
tion skills are necessary for meetings
to work veil and for facilitation to be
effective* These skills are also im-
portant during the day-to-day operation
of the group, as members develop the re-
lationships that help them use consen-
sus at meetings* (See Chapter ll A
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING^ for more
about the importance of oormmmication
in this respect^ and for some sample
conmurvi cation exercises*)

The goal of communication is to increase
understanding between people for a vari-
ety of purposes, You may want to ex-
change information needed for a decision,
express feelings so others will know why
an issue is important to you, ask for
something you need, or increase under-
standing for its own sake — because it
feels good. In this chapter we present
some techniques that can make communica-
tion more effect ive. Many of the skills
we describe are actually tools for pre-
venting or clearing up misunderstanding.
Since misunderstanding is most trouble-
some when it involves feelings or criti-
cism, we will emphasise these personal

areas . But we want to stress that the
principles and skills described here are
useful in ail kinds of communication,
including group discussions where ideas
and opinions are exchanged,

■

LISTENING

Communication involves more than just
accurately transmitting information:
it also requires that people know they
are being understood. Speakers need
^esgonse^ that let them know the other
person hears and cares about what they
are expressing. They also need to know
what the listener thinks or feels in
respons e . tojfii^Q32m^ica^tion . is a
cooperative_acti5tity_ in which people
shareTresponsibility, help and support
each other. {Sounds like consensus
decision t making, doesn't it? It is,)

Listen Actively

n Mm m

People tend to think of the listener 1 s
role as a passive one* The listener
receives from and is acted upon by the
speaker, A good listener, though,
shares the responsibility for increas-
ing understanding by paying close at-
tention and trying to understand. Good
listening means usin g yo ur own co mmuni-
cat ion s kills to^eip-jjoa^jspeaker ^get
thejmes sage__acro s s .

There are several specific things you
can do as a listener:

— Make an effort to really hear what
the speaker is saying. Try to put your-
self in the speaker f s shoes and see
things from her or his perspective.
Refrain from making any judgments for
the time being. Withholding: . j udgment
will help you be more open to what is
said and will help create a non-
threatening climate in which feelings,
beliefs and values can be expressed,

— Let the speaker know that you are
listening, that you care. All those

ile_signals (eye contact, head nods,
"Yeah, I know") can reassure the speaker
that you are involved and that you are
making an effort to understand.

— When you don [ t understand, seek
more information* Ask questions or
paraphrase. {The use of .questions and
paraphrasing is discussed below, )

Examine Your Assumptions

People make generalisations all the
time—there is no avoiding it. They take
specific bits of information and draw
conclusions from them. {Barb is reading
The Women's Room^ so Barb must be a
feminist.) This kind of logical reason-
ing is the way the human mind works.
But in a quest for understanding , assump-
tions about other people, or what they

* mean, may be wrong , or incomplete, or may
close your mind to the true significance
of new information from that person. To
reduce the misunderstanding that assump-
tions can cause, try to be aware of the
conclusions you draw about others. Be
conscious that they are just speculation,
Think about what information has led you

\ to make those assumptions and recognize
that there are other conclusions you
might make from that same information.
When an assumption about another person
affects the way you communicate with
her or him, you might want to share the
assumption with the person and find out

f if it is valid, explaining why you are
doing so,

Try to put yourself in the speaker's shoe
and see things from her or his perspective

Example: YoU might say, "Last week
when I asked you about your medical
problems, you didn r t want to talk
about them. So I T m assuming you
would rather I didn't ever bring up
that subject. Am I right? rT

By explaining why you have made partic-
ular assumptions, you offer others the
opportunity to give you new informa-
tion or explanations. At the same time,
you increase their understanding by
letting them know what you think and
why.

Paraphrase

Paraphrasing is a useful tool for clari-
fying communication during a conversa-
tion. It allows the speaker to know how
well she or he is being understood and
provides a second chance if a message
was misperceived the first time. Para-
phrasing consists of summarizing or re-
stating what you have heard, Jnjrour
own words, and asking the spe aker if
th at is- what wa - s Teally meanly ~~~

Example: In response to repeated
complaints on the theme of "I T m
sick of all this extra work, " you
might say, TT T fr-Mltfe laforfe JT hear
you saying is that you haveTiad to
pick up a lot more work since John
left, and yon don r t think that's
fair* You want the rest of the
staff to pitch in more. Is that
what you mean?"

A tool related to paraphrasing is ex-
pressing the unstated, message, you think
you hear u betw_een_the„ .liags^ and seeing
whether your perceptions are accurate,
( ir I get the Impression that you would
like me to offer to take over one of
your projects. Is that what you want?")
Itls impor tant not to jdo jbhis kind^qf
"reading-between .±haJLin&s--4a--aii .
accusing way. Use this tentative para-
phrasing gently and sensitively.

WA WA

Ask Supportive Questions

Questions are an obvious technique for
getting information needed to understand
the speaker's message better. Often it
is up to the listener to ask questions
because the speaker does not know what

parts of the message are u nclea r, or that
she or r 'he' w Kas^wrongly assumed a common
background of information, a shared in-
terpretation, or an insight that the
listener does not have.

Questions can also be supportive. They
tell the speaker that you are interested
and care about understanding. Sometimes
asking questions lets the speaker know
that it's OK with you to discuss a
subject that she or he finds difficult
to talk about. On the other hand, some-
times questions can put pressure on a
speaker and make her or him feel chal-
lenged or rl on the spot." A person can
be embarrassed by a question she or he
cannot or doesn ! t want to answer. So
be sensitive to the effects of your
questions, A period of silence after a
question may signal discomfort, or it
may mean that the speaker is taking a
question seriously and is thinking about
the answer* Don't assume too quickly
that it means one or the other. Do,
however, be willing to withdraw a ques-
i tion if it is causing the speaker unnec-
essary discomfort.

Sometimes questions can put pressure
on a speaker and make her or him
feel "on the spot,"

There are two basic kinds of questions.
An o pen-ended question allows an unlim-
ited choice of responses . A closed- ended
question has only two, or a small number,
of possible responses, "How are you
feeling right now? 11 is open ended. "Are
you mad at me?" is closed, since the only
possible answers are "yes" and "no,"
Usually open-ended questions are prefer-
able since they don't lead the speaker,
but allow her or him to respond in the
way she or he wants* Use closed-ended
questions when you need specific, de-
fined information. Another tip is that
positively phrased questions are usually
more supportive than negative ones.
"How could we have managed this meeting
better?" is more hopeful, encouraging,
and perhaps more productive than "What
did we do wrong?"

Levels of Responses

Most of the things people say can be
taken on three levels:

— Content : The facts or information
of the message,

— Sentiment : How the speaker feels
about what she or he is saying.

— Intent : The

reason fpr making the

* '/, r£&

J ol

statement.

You can respond to anotfner person 4 s ^ lf *
statement on any one of these levels- <ffl ^
For example, Jane might say, "I sent my
article about our new energy saving
system to the community newspaper. Do
you think they T 11 print it?" A content
response to the question might be, "Well, %
I know they only print about half the
articles they receive, but it's been
awhile since they had anything on that *
topic, so the chances are better than
50-50." A response at the level of
sentiment might be, "Don't be nervous.
I think you did a great job and if they
don't print it, it won't be your fault."
An intent response is one that considers
the question, ''Why did Jane say what she
just said to me?" In this case, such a
response might be, "Are you asking my
opinion because of my own newspaper ex-

perience? I'd be glad to review the
article and give you my opinion, if
that's what you want."

Since each of these responses is poten-
tially an accurate reply to the message,
it can be hard to know when a response
is "off," not at the speaker's intended
level. Sometimes even the speaker can-
not identify why she or he feels a vague
discomfort about a conversation, think-
ing, "We are talking about the subject
I brought up* Why am I not getting
what I want out of the conversation?"

Example: Al might say, "My truck
needs new tires," and Lis might re-
spond on the sentiment level t "Gee,
you must be frustrated. Everything
goes wrong with your truck, and now
this, I know how you must feel*"
Chances are that Al might continue
speaking on Liz's level. "Yes, I'm
sick and tired of dealing with that
old truck," Or, "No, I'm not upset.
I've known the tires were wearing
out for a long time and I've been
saving for new ones," It is easy
for Al to accept Liz ' s response at
face value because it is accurate
or reasonable, without realizing
that he is uncomfortable with the
conversation because he r d hoped to
communicate on the content level.
Liz might have said, "I know some-
thing about tires. What brand are
you planning to buy?" and Al would
have been satisfied by an accurate
response at his intended level.

Different people are more comfortable
communicating at different levels and
may automatically reply at the same
level most of the time. Try to be alert
to all three levels and develop your
ability to respond at each of them.
When something about a conversation
seems "off," use your awareness of the
different levels to diagnose if respond-
ing at the wrong level is the problem.
If you have doubts, ask about the other
person's intent*

i
i
i

i
i

»
i

)

Example: "Are you telling me about
all your bad experiences because you
want emotional support? Or were you
telling me your problems so I won't
repeat your mistakes? Or is it some
other reason?"

FEEDBACK AND CRITICISM

Feedback and criticism are potentially
frightening activities. Sometimes it is
very threatening to hear what another
person thinks about you. It is equally
risky to talk to someone about observa-
tions or problems you have with them.
Yet often when people avoid giving feed-
back or criticism for too long, the
situation gets worse and worse, or the
feelings become increasingly intense,
and an originally minor problem becomes

, a major crisis. It is easier to give
needed feedback and criticism if you

/ know specific communication techniques
that promote clear communication and
minimise threat. The techniques de-
scribed below work best when they are
used in a supportive atmosphere among
people who trust each other. Some
people find it easier to give aiid re-
ceive criticism in a group , when they
are surrounded by friends who provide
emotional support, and who can add their
own insights or perceptions to the
discussion. Others prefer the privacy
of one- on-one interaction where they
can focus exclusively on the person
they are talking to, and where they
feel less vulnerable.

tf*

Feedback

Feedback is telling another person how
you perceive what she or he did or said.
Usually your perceptions are closely
tied to some kind of judgment you have
made about that behavior, an interpre-
tation or evaluation. When you give
feedback to someone, it is important
to separate the specific behavior from
your judgment about it. If you tell
Bill he is lazy, he will probably not
know why you think that. If you speci-
fy that he is behind on his work load,
or that he doesn't put the lids back on
jars, he will know what you are talking
about, (And what is going to be more
productive to talk about? An abstract
concept like laziness, or specific be-
haviors like keeping up with a work
load?) The most useful feedback
describes rather than evaluates. It
is specific rather than general. And
if it does include some kind of inter-
pretation on your part, it should be
stated in tentative rather than absolute
terms. ( tr You seem like you have a lot
of enthusiasm for this project, TT rather
than, "You're really in a hurry to dive
into this. 11 )

Criticism

Criticism is a complex process that in-
cludes feedback. Criticism is appro-
priate when another person's behavior,
as you have observed it, has caused a
problem and when you are dissatisfied and
want change. The process of criticism
includes telling the other person your
observations, explaining how you feel
about their behaviors, and stating what
you want to be different and why.

ConrmunJcation Skills Section and scope:

The sections on Conmun, stalls, emotions* etc* are good, but they
[ stray far fiuc^x from consensus per se. There's too much here. Says Joe;
> it strays too far from what he'd expect a consensus manual to include;
[He suggests cutting back on the common, section, editing back to the
skills directly related to Facilitating the reaching of consensus, for
instance, talking about eye contact as an important tool for the facili-
tator to use In assessing if someone is finished speaking, or wants to

speak, etc.

Joe is alpo making an aesthetic judgment about the scope of the
book as it no^ stands. He thinks It lacks unity, is kinB of unwetldy.

He suggests using Appendices for the less-central material.

Although it often has negative connota-
tions in this culture, criticism can be
used in a positive, growth-oriented way.
It can help groups to see new and better
ways of working together, A construc-
tively critical process can enhance group
unity by correcting misunderstandings
and relieving fears that keep group mem-
bers from working together effectively.
These positive effects are most likely
to happen when criticism is separated
from blame and approached as a shared f
cooperative process.

Before you criticise someone, ask your-
self:

—Is it an appropriate time to dis-
cuss this topic?

— Is the person in a good emotional
state to receive criticism?

— Am I in a good frame of mind myself?
(Or do I just want to strike out some-
where because of other frustrations I am
feeling?)

— Is the behavior or problem something
that the other person has the power to
change?

— Am I willing to take responsibility
for helping to make that change? (This
might include being specific about what
you want, maintaining the relationship
long enough to provide necessary emo-
tional support j being open to compro-
mise or change yourself, )

— Has the person indicated a willing-
ness to hear the criticism? Is it about
something she or he has been told before
and chosen not to act on?

Steps for giving criticism:

A ■■■■■— i , . tT ■ ■

1. If the criticism is potentially
upsetting for the other person, or if it
will require a long discussion, then ask
first whether this is a good time for
the person to talk about something im-
portant,

2, Begin by giving feedback about
the specific behavior you are responding
to. Behavioral feedback requires a de-
scription of what was done and includes
statements prefaced with, ir When I saw
you do , , ," — "You said a few minutes
ago that , , . " It is an observation
without evaluating what you saw.

3- The next step is to identify how
you feel about the behavior. Verbalising
feel ings independently of the stated ob-
servation has several advantages: a) it
reduces the chance that the criticism
will be misinterpreted; b) it allows oth-
ers to understand your feelings and to
correct you if they think your interpre-
tation is wrong; and c) it expresses
mutual responsibility by assuming that
your feelings and the other person f s
behavior combine to make a shared problem*

=<■*. i

^VoV. -

ft*

J*- -y* ^-^-^^v^t^ 4*«~U?^

4»V*M-Jbl_~

*-^jy-*3 yp*-<LJU.'t

C43*+*- -fa U**&LJk~

(— "KaeJk

HCkU. ct+k- /ks.^ '+ ^

**-*Afc

^fi^\ <atuxaWft<Arf_p

V%\* ^ ^ A^ ^V»^^WNN* ^^ N^^ V N

N**rt* * *^ V * A iS*S^ ^^ WM W»i

*^ ^ V

._!. AS

r ?7y/

*3 1 - -

» &4jl>v &-U^V^ _£L&~&&

Example: A feeling statement after
a description of the behavior might
be, "When you take time off to chat
with your friends during working
hours , I have to cover for you and
then I think I am being taken advan^
tage of and I get angry,"

V, You also have to state what you
want the other person to do differentl y.
H ake clear what you want thgm^ t o doj fnot
fagl^thiak or be). Say what you want,

not what youdon't want, ( tr I want you
to tell me when you think I am being rude
to you/* rather than, t! I don r t want you
to hide your feelings from me/ 1 )

If there is any question about who you
arejaddres&ing, make that clear- If ~y5u
say to^a group, "Some of us need to be
more careful about cleaning up after
ourselves," everyone will wonder who you
mean, and if it could be themselves.
( T1 I think I left a dirty coffee cup out
last week. I wonder if he's mad at me.")
It ' s better to be direct, about who you
are talking to,

5* The final step is to say why you
want the change . Explaining "why" might
require a statement about your own values
("I really like to work in a clean of-
fice") or it may clarify how the change
in behavior will help you ("If I'm not
distracted, I can get my work done more
quickly" ) . Openly expressing your own
yajjieg, and ja^e^e^ helps to make criticism
a cooperative process. The other person
can better understand the reasons for

your criticism and has an opportunity to
object if your reasons seem wrong or
unfair. Sharing information also in-
creases the likelihood of a mutually
agreeable change.

Receiving criticism : When you are being
criticized, try to listen well, using the
techniques described above under "Listen-
ing. " The following rules are helpful to
remember.

1- Listen carefully to what the per-
son is saying. Refrain initially from
expressing your agreement or disagree-
ment. Simply show that you have under-
stood. Paraphrasing is helpful here.
You might say, "The problem, then, as
you see it, is • , . " — "If I understand
you correctly, you feel we should + . . "
After you have summarised what you heard ,
give the person a chance to agree or dis-
agree with your perceptions. Continue to
liste n actively and ga^aphrase until all
misunderstanding seems to be resolved and
you believe that you understand what the
person thinks, feels, and would like to
see happen to change things.

2- Wait quietly through pauses in the
conversation to encourage the other per-
son to say all that may be on her or his
mind. Don't rush to fill silences.

3- Use open-ended questions to en-
courage the person to continue talking*
"How did you feel about that?" — "Is
there anything else that's bothering
you?" — "Where do you think we disagree?"

4. Don f t take the focus of the con-
vers at ion away from the person who is
criticizing you by disagreeing or by
talking about yourself, your thoughts,
or your perceptions* Delay your re-
V sponse until you have heard what she or
A he has to say and you have used para-
phrasing or other techniques to check
your understanding of the criticism.
Only when you understand, and the other
person agrees that you understand, is
it time to respond with your own per-
ceptions and feelings •

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

PARENT EFFECTIVENESS TRAINING by Thomas
Gordon

JOINING TOGETHER by Frank and David
Johnson

CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM by Gracie Lyons

"Face Saving j Criticism and Defensive^
ness n by Celeste Rice

■■/

CONCLUSION

The techniques described above are tools
for communicating more effectively. If
used judiciously, you can communicate
better yourself and can help others to
do so as well. Please do not treat these
tools as dogma or use them to gain an
unfair advantage over people who have
not learned the skills- An unsympa-
thetic use of verbal proficiency by one
person can intimidate others who are
less skilled, and can cause resentment.
Communication in consensus groups should
be used to increase understanding among
people, and the tools described in this
chapter should be used toward that end.

I r

er 9

Working With Emotions

WHY BE CONCERNED ABOUT FEELINGS?

Attention to emotions in a group is a
practical and sometimes a necessary part
of getting the group's wbrk done,

— A constructive and sensitive look
at members 1 feelings may not only point
out problems that might otherwise be
overlooked, but can also be the spark of
energy by which creative solutions are
found.

--Working directly with feelings can
avert serious problems those feelings
could cause if left unattended. A "hid-
den ag enda , TT for example, is an unex-
pressed motivation that leads a group
member to behave a certain way, or to
promote a certain decision.

Example: Dan may urge the group to
act quickly on a certain proposal
for a number of reasons which he ex-
plains to the group. But his hidden
agenda may be the fact that he Is in
a bad mood and wants the meeting to
end quickly so he can go home*

A group can work together better when
members try to be aware of their hidden
agendas and address them when they cause
problems.

— At times the whole group will ex-
perience feelings that disrupt their
work* In such cases, it's better to
respond to those feelings and do some-
thing about them than to limp along with
an ineffective process.

— You may want to try to affect the
emotional climate in a way that will help
the group, to increase members 1 happi-
ness and satisfaction so they will con-
tinue to be active members. To do this,
you must address members' feelings and
the things that affect those feelings,

Peelings are an important part of the
experience of working with a group.

Most people value being in a group for
emotional reasons: it feels good to be
with people they like, to share with
others, and to get emotional support
for the work they are doing. But since
feelings can be hard to understand, to
control, or to predict, groups often
ignore their emotional experience and
focus on the "t hin king work" at hand.
Since most people aren T t as skilled or
confident in working with emotions as
they are at functioning rationally,
they often just hope that the feelings
will take care of themselves.

Most of the time you can get away with
neglecting emotions because the norm in
this culture is not to show strong feel-
ings except to a few, intimate friends.
Yet those emotions are there and they
affect the group and its individual mem-
bers* People may be experiencing any
of a wide range of pleasant or unpleas-
ant feelings or attitudes toward other
group members, toward the whole group,
or toward the world at large. These
feelings are an important part of the
groups experience and members need to
be able to respond to those feelings
when it becomes necessary.

TEE SOURCES OF FEELINGS IN GROUPS

Sometimes it doesn't matter where feel-
ings come from — the important question
is what to do about them. At times ,
though, identifying the source of cer-
tain emotions can help you handle their
effects. Below are some places to
look for sour ces o f feelings.

One obvious source of feelings is the
immediate situation in the group r For
instance, you may feel a sense of ur-
gency that a proposed measure be adopt-
ed; you may feel angry or hurt about a
comment that ignores or belittles your
perspective; you may feel pleased about
how well your group works together and
feel a secure, happy sense of belonging.
These kinds of feelings arise from a
specific, imffi§4iate situation.

Another source of feelings in a group is
jpast inisraetj^ns . You may hold a grudge
""from a time in the past when you didn't
get what you thought you should* Resent-
ments remaining from past struggles over
power issues might bring anger, guilt,
fear, and other feelings into play.
Whatever their source, emotions rooted
in past experiences are usually less
clear and understandable than feelings
arising from current events,

A third source of feelings is a group's
natural emotional cycles. There are two
types of cycles. The first, the work -
emotion cycle, involves the feelings that

arise out of the group's normal work pro-
cess. For example, working in a meeting
is often frustrating. The frustration
builds up until the group needs to blow
off steam by joking, arguing, gossiping,
stretching, generally relaxing and re-
focusing- This type of cycle is natural
and should be expected. {See the "Meet-
ing Phases " section of Chapter 6^
STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS. )

A group's emotional life cycle also af-
fects members 1 feelings. There are cer-
tain points in a group's history when
members have more specific emotional
needs than at other times: when the
group is first forming, when it adds new
members, when it changes its goals and
direction, when individuals in the group
give up something familiar, such as an
accustomed role or control over a task
they've handled for awhile. These t lines
are emotionally difficult because mem-
bers are uncertain of how to act in the
group and because they are re-negotiating
power and influence relations in the
group. Such periods are often marked
with open conflict; almost always members
will feel Some tension.

DIAGNOSIS: WHAT'S GOING ON?

While you're thinking about the sources
of feelings in a group, look to your in~

ioris^ Often you'll know that emo-
tions are affecting group process, with-
out being sure what the feelings are or
how they're working. If you sense that
the feelings are important, don't be
afraid to ask the affected members
what's going on.

It's useful to remember that this ^cjiI^
tnre-^ ggneral]y d isnQyirftg»p.q pgnp]_g_Jr^Tn — -
express ing feelings , so even a wrought-
up group may not be showing much emotion
outwardly* A group that has not built
up a base of mutual trust will be less
open in showing feelings than will a
relaxed and trusting group. An indi-
vidual who doesn't yet trust the group
also tends to be less open. As you
look at the group, keep in minct-the
dggpee^CJini^ and be

sensitive to $ubtle_ej^res s ion (or sup-
' — ^oression) of emotions*

Tension and boredom in a group may be
signs that emotions are influencing the
group's process or progress. Some indi-
cations of tension are: long uncomfort-
'^Nble silences (as opposed to comfortable
periods of quiet), lack of eye contact,
people withdrawing into themselves, out-
bursts of anger, one person dominating

the discussion while others hold back,
a general lack of sharpness or focus in
the group, noticeably more or less jok-
W ing and noisiness or quietness than

usual, or people talking more quietly
1/ or loudly than usual. Common signs of
'\boredom include wandering eyes, coughing,
slow responses to questions, and of
course, snoring*

Remember, though, that all these behav-
iors are also ordinary and normal to
some degree. Please do not over-analyze
your group. No group is always smooth
and ideally "together," Li fact, groups
often value tension as a prerequisite to
creativity, and awkwardness as a sign of
humanness. Look for these signs only in

conjunction with your own intuitive sense
about feelings in your group. They may
help you see concretely what you only
vaguely sensed before.

WHEN FEELINGS ARE A PROBLEM

There are two kinds of strategies you
can follow when you see feelings are
having an undesirable effect on a group.
You can either do nothing, or you can
intervene- -take action to change the
situation.

The first option, non-intervention, is
often ignored. People usually try to
smooth away anger, hurt feelings or sor-
row because they fear such unpleasant
emotions. Rarely do members take ad-
vantage of the constructive role that
emotional struggles can play in moving
a group along to creative changes and
growth. Even if the feelings are not
likely to have a long-range positive
effect, it still may do more harm than
good to bring the emotional state of the
group out into the open. The feelings
may be caused by something you have no
power to change (a crisis in the private
life of a group member, the candidate
you worked so hard for lost the elec-
tion) and talking about it right now
might just make people feel worse.
Perhaps it's just one of those things
that will blow over. Perhaps it's
something that needs to be dealt with,

but this isn't the right time. Keep in
mind that often the best action is noth-
* ing other than flowing with the current
of events.

If you decide to intervene , there are two
ways of doing so; you can diagnose the
need and try to fill it without talking
I about it; or you can talk with the group
about what you see, and suggest action or
get the group to decide what to do.

As an example of the former case, you
might notice that the group is restless
and suggest a break. You don't have to
tell the group that it is restless. Your
intervention can move the group to a
state where it can get work done, but it
doesn't require that everyone re-direct
their attention to the group's process.
It is especially helpful if many members

of the group are alert to signs of feel-
ings in the group and can share the role
of intervening or facilitating on the
emotional level.

The other option is to openly intervene
by telling the group what feelings you
sense. The group as a whole may then
choose to discuss the feelings and act
on them. This is the most straight-
forward approach, and working together
on feelings can strengthen and unify a
group. Some potential problems with
this approach are that it can increase
tension in the group and distract it
from the task at hand. If the group
fails to respond well, the effect can be
demoralizing.

Most groups find some kind of balance
between the amount of energy they put

AN "OPEN" -INTERVENTION

A group of demonstrators had been block-
ading a nuclear pover plant. Unexpected-
ly, a large number of guards rushed from
inside the plant grounds, picked the
demonstrators up bodily, and hurled them
aside in order to allow a new shift of
workers- to be rushed through the gate.
The demonstrators, physically and psy-
chically bruised, met to decide what to
do next. Frustration and anger were
causing much tension, and people were
close to flying off the handle. They
were not thinking clearly and were more
concerned about revenge than about the
original purpose of the demonstration.
Finally, one man said, "I don't like the
way we are feeling and acting right now*
Can we sing a song to calm ourselves
down? 1 * The group spent about five min-
utes singing a peaceful song. People
relaxed* began thinking clearly again,
and were able to get a better perspec-
tive on the situation. They went home
feeling good about themselves and each
other, ready to plan for the next step
in a long campaign. A violent reaction
was averted and positive energy was re-
ignited for working towards the group f s
goals.

A "SILENT* 1 INTERVENTION

CCR met to have a potluck in one member's
home. It was intended to precede another
long, difficult meeting in a series of
tense meetings with overloaded agendas.
One member came to the meeting grieving
over a personal tragedy that had occurred
recently, and he described his feelings
to the group during the check- in time
that normally begins our meetings. Other
members, feeling this person's sadness,

and also knowing that the group as a
whole needed to nourish each other inore
than we needed to address our work for
the night, dropped the meeting's agenda
in an unspoken agreement. The evening
was spent sitting quietly around the
table, reminiscing about memories > and
learning about each other's past experi-
ences. Sharing these things quietly
with each other allowed us to go home
feeling re- connected as a group. We got
a little further behind on our tasks,
but in the long run group unity and com-
mitment towards those tasks was im-
proved . The meeting is still remembered
as a special time that reminded each of
ue why we have chosen to work together*

- into working on feelings and the amount
they focus on their tasks. Too much
time spent on feelings can be exhaust-
ing and can keep the group from getting
work done. Too little time on feelings
may result in members feeling unsupport-
ed and becoming alienated, or may hurt
group cohesion because members don't
have a chance to feel personally in-
volved with each other.

When you are deciding what approach to
use for responding to emotions in your
* group, consider the group, the problem
or situation, what your goals are, and
what you yourself are comfortable with.

Specific Intervention Techniques for
Responding to Feelings

If you opt for some kind of intervention,
there are several techniques you can use.
Some are better suited to working with
"positive" feelings and some are better
for "negative" ones,.- Some'are applicable
to both kinds of situations,

— Energy and excitement can be chan-
neled productively into a brainstorming
session that will bring out lots of
good ideas, Round robin excitement
sharing can bring out the good feelings
more explicitly. Or the group can ap-
plaud or celebrate itself in some other
way, such as a dance or song.

^ r

— A session spent working with anger,
fear, or other unpleasant feelings can
start with a minute of silence. Each
person can use this time to identify
and clarify his or her own feelings, and
to become composed enough to prevent a
destructive interchange later on, S j-
la nce is an opportunity for members to

think for a moment without distraction,
but it has benefits that go beyond the
rational thought that occurs during this
period. Silence is often soothing, .al-
lows members to become "centered l T ir and
breaks the flow of competitive, over-
excited interchange. Often during si-
lence, a member will realise that a
point he or she was arguing for so
urgently isn't really that important
after all.

• — "Fears in the hat" is a useful de-
vice for dealing with peopled worries
and developing empathy and solidarity
in the group. Have each person write
down a fear they have about a problem
(or another feeling about a stated topic),
Put the unsigned slips of paper into a
hat. Then pass the hat around and have
each person draw a paper , read it, and
say how he or she feels about it. Can
he or she empathize, give encourage-
ment, or identify with the feelings ex-
pressed? This exercise can help members
see the common lines of feelings in the
group. They may feel relieved to hear
their own fears stated by others, or
they might get a new perspective on what
others are feeling. _ A

— "Light and Livelies," or quick
games, help people loosen up and feel
like full human beings rather than
thinking machines. These activities
may also lessen or smooth out bad feel-
ings that arose in recent discussion.
Of course, games also take advantage
of the good energy in a group- (For a
fuller explanation of this technique ^
see the section entitled "Encourage
Social Interaction** in Chapter XI ^
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING. )

— Finally, at times, emotions are
best dealt with in an informal way, out-
side the group meeting , The facilitator
or another member might take responsi-
bility for checking on someone's feelings
during a break or after the meeting. Or.
if there is a conflict between two people
the disputants may decide to deal with
it later, between themselves*

Long- Range Techniques for Your Group

There will always be occasional little
emotional crises that pop up from time
to time and need to be dealt with on the
spot, using techniques like the ones
described above, A lot can be done,
though, to build your group's ability
to deal with day-to-day feelings an a
healthy way* Below are some suggestions

—Try to foster in your group a habit
of communicating openly about feelings.
You, as an individual, can help this
along by acting as a model, expressing
your own feelings, and encouraging oth-
ers to do so by asking supportive ques-
tions.

—End all meetings with an evaluation
session. By promoting opportunities for
members to speak personally, be open
with their feelings, and be specific in
their comments, your group can avoid
defensiveness and build trust in its mem-
bers. (See "Evaluations" in Chapter 5,
STRUCTURING WUR MEETINGS. )

— Hold occasional meetings for the
purpose of dealing with feelings. Mem-
bers can be encouraged to talk about
their feelings about the group, about
others in the group, about their own
role, or other pertinent issues. These
sessions can take the form of a weekend
retreat, a twice-a-year general evalua-
tion session, or whatever seems best for
the group.

See Chapter ll> TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP
BUILDING^ for more ideas about how to
develop a group that can deal with
feelings in a constructive and support-
ive way.

Talking About Fears and Resentments

Outbursts of anger or disgust often
signal an opening up, like a dam burst-
ing. Your first tendency might be to
try to cool things down, but sometimes
it's a good idea to take advantage of
this expression of previously-suppressed
feelings. The problem is that while the
outburst of hard feelings can be a cata-
lyst for constructive change and move-
ment, many people have trouble talking

about the fears and anger which they may
have towards other group members. Be-
cause they want to avoid conflict, be-
cause they don T t want to hurt others or
make them angry, because they are afraid
of being wrong, or because they just
don't have a good opportunity, members
often hold these feelings inside. This

can allow tensions to build up and mis-
understandings to occur, thus interfering
with participants' enjoyment of the
group's work.

V v

Groups that practice radical therapy use

specific technique to get these feel-
ings out in the open. They plan a cer-
Ktain time in a meeting when members can
express "paranoid fantasies 11 and "held
resentments. rf

A "paranoid fantasy" is a fear about
someone else's thoughts, feelings or
intentions. This is Ron's chance to say,
"Dina, you kept looking out the window
while I was talking awhile ago, and I
was afraid you were disapproving of my
ideas, but didn't want to say so." Since
a fear of this kind is always based on
some kind of experience, Dina should
answer Ron by searching for whatever
grain of truth she can find in his fear
and responding to it. Perhaps he was
right; if so, Dina should acknowledge
it. Perhaps Dina didn't disapprove of
Ron's ideas, but her mind was wandering
to some personal concerns and it was
understandable that Ron should take her
inattention personally. In that case,
she should explain,

"Held resentments 11 are private angers or
irritations with the behavior of others
in the group. Perhaps these angers seem
petty, or unjustified, or perhaps they
signify a greater underlying conflict.
Whatever the case, the feelings are real.
Expressing them in an honest, respectful
way to the person involved brings the
problems out in the light where they can
be taken care of, or simply acknowledged.
(A good way of expressing tr held resent-
ments'* is described under "Feedback and
Criticism" in Chapter 5 4 COMMUNICATION
SKILLS. )

You may not want to set aside time for
these feelings at all your meetings, but
it is useful to do so occasionally.
** Besides giving group members an oppor-
tunity to express hidden feelings, it
will give them a chance to learn how to
work with the feelings. It also helps

the group acknowledge the importance of
paying attention to feelings, which may
encourage members to express fears and
angers more constructively at all times.

WHEN FEELINGS HELP A GROUP

We want to remind you that all those
good-feeling emotions are important and
require attention, too! Shared excite-
ment, love for each other, satisfaction
with the group's work, and good humor
are all part of the rewards of being in
a good group , These feelings should be
valued and nurtured. The group may want
to analyze: "Where does this feeling
come from? What can we do to make it
happen in the future?" The suggestions
above for analysing the sources of feel-
ings and responding to them are appli-
cable here.

Occasionally, exuberant high spirits
will get in the way of doing an impor-
tant task. In such an instance, you
may choose to give into those feelings,
deciding that the good group experience
is worth a loss of time at work. If the
work has to be done, though,' you can
intervene by using a group activity that
burns excess energy and allows expres-
sion of all those happy feelings that
are trying to burst out—perhaps a group
song — before digging back into work*

Sometimes unpleasant emotions are good
for the group , too, and should be
temporarily encouraged. Open expression
of conflict can clear the air and make
the group aware of problems that need
to be solved. At times anger at social
wrongs is valuable because it gives
people energy to work for change • A
strong expression of anger or pain by
one group member can make everyone aware
of how important it is to change a bad
situation*

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCE

SOLVING WOMEN 7 S PROBLEMS by Hogie
Wyckoff

vy*AAAA*

«- cAa-^uiUt^ l^i

H*to. tot oaJ ) 0<ut ^

oJb^ut lis- ty

*A\.

A)«c=) sfcrf ju^ o'TU

Jul

■4

* v w* ^

* w«w*wN**««W V

Chapter 10

Conflict and Problem Solving

Conflict is a natural * healthy part of
any group's process. In fact, If there
is little or no conflict in your group,
you should be suspicious. Members may
be holding back some of their real
thoughts and feelings because they are
afraid that expressing disagreement
might be destructive to the group or
the people in it. This is dangerous.
Conflict that is suppressed and stored
up can lead to smoldering resentments
that might erupt in the future* It's
true that conflict can be destructive.
If the group handles it properly, how-
ever, conflict can also be constructive ,
leading to greater clarity, creativity
and growth.

GUIDELINES FOR RESPONDING TO CONFLICT

If you have been reading this handbook
straight through up to this point, most
of the concepts described below will al-
ready be familiar to you* The same
group skills and principles that are
useful in consensus decision making are
also useful for responding to conflict.
You might want to treat this chapter as
a quick review of some of the most im-
portant points expressed earlier, as
well as a good framework to fall back
on when there is a conflict in your
group and you need to know what to do.

1, Accept conflict as natural. Don f t
be afraid of it. When conflict occurs in
your group, treat it as an opportunity to
examine the issues involved in depth and
to learn more about the underlying values
and assumptions you hold. Accept the S
challenge to find imaginative and crea-
tive responses to conflicting ideas.

2* Bring hidden conflicts out in the
open. If you think there is a conflict
hidden under the surface that is causing
problems in the group, call it out at an
appropriate time. If you see signs of
unexpressed disagreement, ask those in-
volved what they are feeling.

3. Disagree with ideas, not with
people. Don't accuse or blame group
members who are in conflict with you*
Try to put yourself in their shoes:
what are their needs, values, assump-
tions and previous experiences? Remem-
ber that your goal is to work together

* to find a mutually acceptable solution.
This task may be difficult when you're
in the heat of an argument, but do it to
the degree that you can. No matter how
intense a conflict is, never turn a dis-
agreement over ideas, beliefs, proce-

y dures or plans into a personal attack
against another person,

k m When defining an issue or problem,
1 always define it as shared. Responsi-
bility for a conflict never lies with
just one person or faction. Say, ,r We do
not agree about distribution of office
space, " not "Jack refuses to share his
desk, tr Say, "Mary and Tom have a prob-
lem coordinating their work schedules,"
not "Tom is never around when Mary needs
to consult with him*"

5* Identify and focus on the most
^ important, central issues to the conflict.
Sometimes a group will flounder in gener-
al disagreement or confusion about a
decision until someone "sharpens" the
conflict by pointing out where the most
basic point of contention seems to be*
Focusing on this issue may have the
short-range effect of escalating conflict,

* but it is a necessary step to understand-
ing and dealing with disagreement.

Example: Your group is trying to de-
cide whether to donate some money to
the strike fund of a local union that
needs support. The discussion touches
on political issues, how long the
strike is likely to last, how much
the group can affort, expected ex-
penses coming up, how responsible your
group is to contributors who have
given it money to spend on its own
projects. Then someone says, "It
seems to me that the real issue here
is whether or not we need to keep some
money in reserve for emergencies. I
think Susan and Rich are saying that
it's important to do that, while Pat

is saying that we need to use our
funds, not hoard them up." This state-
ment turns out to be right on target
and leads to a heated debate. But now
the group is focused on working out
the central issue, rather than dis-
1 cussing peripheral topics on which
there is little basic disagreement.

To identify what is the central issue for
you, don f t argue just for the sake of ar-
; guing. Instead of dwelling on what is
i wrong with a statement you disagree with,
try looking for what is right. There may
y be areas where you just can't find right-
% ness, ideas which you cannot bring your-
self to accept; these are the important
issues in the conflict, JTour^i^a^on^may
be based in logical principlejS ^^or j
majThave^oM^j^TrTea
legitimate.

Both are

Once you feel you understand
the important issues in a conflict, don't
get sidetracked into tangential subjects,

6. Don't polarize the conflicting

' J positions. It is easy to start looking
at a conflict in terms of mutually ex-
clusive positions, ("You are either with
me or against me.") This attitude may
blind participants to the wide range of
direct ions j viewpoints, and decisions
that will be available if they keep their
minds open.

7. Don't compromise too quickly. By
; "compromise," we mean a solution that is

halfway between the opposing viewpoints,
in which each side gets part, but not all
of what it wanted. Compromise often
seems to be the fairest response, or at
least an easy way to end a conflict
quickly. And sometimes after consider-
ing a problem in depth, a group may de-
cide that a compromise is a necessary,
or even the best, solution. By compromis-
ing too quickly, however, you may not
% adequately explore the problem and its
potential solutions. The ideal solution
to a conflict is a creative one which
finds a way to give everyone what they
most need.

Example: A few members of a collec-
tive store argue that the store should
be open on Saturdays, Many of the
clientele they are trying to serve do
their shopping on Saturday, and fre-
quently express disappointment that
the store isn't open then* Other
staff members are against this pro-
posal because they value having the
whole weekend free* An obvious com-
promise would be to have the store
open on alternate Saturdays, or to
have it open Saturday mornings only.
As the argument progresses, however,
a solution is found that answers both
sides 1 needs* The store will be open
every Saturday, and the collective
will hire someone part-time from the
community to staff the store on those
days* Anticipated increased business
on Saturdays will provide the revenue
to pay the additional salary.

^ 8. If you aren f t centrally involved
Tin a conflict, don't take sides too
* quickly. The guidelines described above
are often difficult to follow for per-
sons who are emotionally embroiled in a
heated debate. By remaining nonpartisan,
you can better watch the process of the
^meeting and help see that the guidelines
are being followed. This doesn't mean
that you shouldn't develop and express
your opinion — you should. But at the
same time, try to keep an open mind. If
you del ay committin g yourself to _a L _parr_,
tlcular]j?CTs± t^ be~~able to *

c onsider more information Jbiatxcaaea.-out
JL n lat er dis"cussiojL^and_yQiL will have^
more^Time^to think about the issue,

9. Try to be aware of your own ^e^l—-
Jngs and opinions during a conflict.
The more you can cleaj^£_exp£g££_iLhat is
* most important to you, what you really
need and want, the better you will be
able to communicate and negotiate with

others* Very often people get side-
tracked into intellectual, practical, or
y political discussions because they are
not aware of, or don't express, what they
really feel.

Example: Jan. Celeste and Chel were
planning a workshop agenda* A par-
ticular activity had been suggested and
Chel kept coming up with practical
reasons why the activity wouldn't work*
Jan and Celeste kept responding to
Chel's statements by telling her why
the activity would work. Finally
Chel said, "Wait a minute. I'm just
thinking of all these problems be-
cause I really hate that activity and
I don ! t want to do it. In this case,
Jan and Celeste said. "OK* Then let*s
try to think of a different activity. 1 '
They might have said, "Can we go ahead
and do the activity, but you find a
role for yourself that you wouldn't
mind too much? 1T or 1T We understand your
feelings, but we would like to go
ahead and do the activity, Will you
agree to it, even though you don't
like it? u or "Let's talk about your
feelings about the activity and see
if we can identify why you don't like
it and what we can do about it, IT All
t of these responses deal with the real
problem, once it has been identified*
But until Chel stated her true feel-
ings, the group was bogged down in a
pointless discussion of imaginary prob-
lems*

You can also help other group members
identify their feelings if they are not
doing so themselves. In the example
above, Jan or Celeste might have said to
Chel, n It seems that you don't want to do
this activity. Is there some reason why,
other than the ones you are saying?"
People tend to think that their needs
and wants should be logically justifi-

w w mw

LANGUAGE:

Ailsa says: 1 don't like calling any feelings "negative."

Joe says: "Objections" is the language of Parliamentary Procedure
Revise out, substitute with "concerns 11 or "resentments" or etc.

able, so they often resort to rational
arguments about subjects that actually
have to do with their feelings. It is
legitimate, however, to say, T1 I feel un-
comfortable about this, even though I T m
not sure why yet." The group should
respect and support such a statement and
should help the individual explore the
reasons more, (This kind of exploration
can be a fruitful experience that broad-
ens the group 1 s awareness , but it can
also be overdone. Don*t let every single
second thought trip you up when you have
thoroughly examined an issue and it is
time to move ahead. }

It is also important to know whgtyou
a^aUyijfcto issue ..■

wfien it comes to choosing a final deci-
sion. Identify which areas you can
compromise or give up on, and don l t
get stuck defending them to the death
for the sake of principle, or because
you hate to give in. On the other hand,
don't offer to compromise just to be a
good sport in areas that are very impor-
tant to you. If you_^gre_e_to _ajiecisiq»
unwilli nglx (or allow someone else to do
"so), youwon T t really be committed to
the agreement, or you will carry around
resentment that might cause trouble later

10. Remember that at times, the best
tool for constructive conflict is a
little quiet time. It is important for
people to express themselves during im-
portant discussions ; but sometimes the
atmosphere gets so argumentative that
people are no longer listening to each
other. At this point, try calling a
break, asking for a few minutes 1 silence,
suggesting that people count to ten be-
fore responding to a previous speaker,
or in the case of an apparent deadlock,
suggesting that the discussion stop and
be picked up again at another time,

11. Finally, when normal meeting
discussion doesn't seem sufficient to
work out a conflict, you may want to set
up a sj^eei&l, st^ctur£d_procesj^JE^r
dealing wit h it . Schedule a special
meeEIagj or even an all- day retreaTT and
use a neutral facilitator (either from

inside or outside the group) to help you
through a program for dealing with the
conflict. One such structured process,
the "Creative Problem Solving Technique,"
is described in the following section.

WAYS WE DQH'T ACCEPT OBJECTIONS

Pressure is put on people to withdraw ob-
jections; people with objections are oade
to feel separate from the group; people
are sometimes cross-examined in a hostile
fashion about their objection; time is
wasted arguing on whether an objection is
right, rather than focusing on what can be
done to EQet it*

from ISVEST

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOL'

The creative problem solving technique
employs the basic principles useful in any
good decision making process, Normally
groups try to apply these methods in an
\r informal way, But when a group is dead-
v locked in a conflict, or when_an issue
, j is so volatile that it is hard to use
Ngood decision -making techniques, a for-
malised, step-by- step process can pro-
vide a framework for approaching the
situation in a constructive way.

Step 1: Set up a special meeting- The
problem- solving process takes plenty of
time, and it can't be rushed: don r t ex-
* pect it to be a short meeting. Call in
someone to facilitate who is not person-
ally involved in the conflict*

Step 2 : Clear the air . If there is
a great deal of hostility between the
parties, this must be dealt with first.
The process works most effectively when
the conflicting parties trust one anoth-
er; they must at least be committed to
trying to meet each other T s needs as well
as their own. You may want to use some

communication or interpersonal sensitiv-
ity exercises to build trust and under-
standing, (Some exercises can be found
in Chapter 11 > TECHNIQUES FOB GROUP
BUILDING y in the section entitled "In-
crease Involvement and Trust. " Also
see references mentioned at the end of
this chapter,)

Step 3 : Define the problem . Define
' it as shared s not as the fault of, or
belonging to, one f1 side ir in the conflict.
If you define a problem as shared , then
the definition of a "successful" solution
will be one that meets everyone's needs,
rather than one that meets just your own.

Define the problem in terms of needs , not
la terms of a solution. Define those
needs as specifically as possible.

Example: To say, "We need to get more
help from volunteers" is defining a
solution. To say, "We have trouble
getting everything done that we want
•~n to do," is defining a need. To say,
"We have trouble getting the work
power to do our monthly mailings and
to clean up the building/ 1 is defining
needs even more specifically.

There are several reasons for focusing on
needs: a) it allows you to check out the

legitimacy of the need (is it really so
important? Is it a disguise for a dif-
ferent need?}; b) it allows you creative
freedom in searching for a solution, in-
stead of following just one avenue; and
c) it ensures that everyone is focusing
on the same problem.

■

Step k : Analyze the problem . Trace
its hist cry j the involvement of the
parties concerned, people's feelings.
Get as clear an understanding as pos-
sible. During this step you should
jr still focus on sharing understanding, ■
not arguing about who is right or wrong,
and not pursuing solutions.

Step 5 : Brainstorm solutions . By
"brainstorm" we mean that everyone should
offer every single idea she or he can
think of for responding to the problem-
Don 1 t worry about whether ideas are good

AH EXAMFLE OF PROBLEM SOLVING

Here is an example of how the probleah-
solvlag technique might be used in a
epecific situation. The imaginary prob-
lem involves a collective restaurant
staff which is having trouble with their
bookkeeper s Jerry* Host of the staff
don f t want to work with Jerry anymore
and are asking hina to leave. Jerry in-
sists that they can't do this because
the decision must be made by consensus
and he, as a group member, blocks con-
sensus on his own expulsion. A couple
of other staff members support his right
to do this* Feelings of anger, hostility
and distrust are high*

Establis hing the

a special

Steps 1 and 2:
setting . The group sets
meeting to work oil this problem* They
invite a neutral facilitator skilled
in group process, to come in and guide
them through the meeting, The first
hour is spent expressing the mutual
respect and trust they have for one
another . They do some communications
exerciaes to clarify their understanding
of their feelings. Each person tries to
remember one good experience she or he
has had with Jerry In the last month*
Jerry tries to think of positive experi-
ences he has had with other members of
the staff.

Step 3: Defining the p roblem. The
problem is defined thus: Jerry and the
other members of the staff have con-
flicting needs in the way they want to
work. The other staff want to know what
Jerry is doing, what decisions he is
making, and how he is representing the
group to outside people. Jerry wants to
get his work done efficiently, without
spending time consulting with people*
Re wants the rest of the collective to
trust frim and let hia work independently-

Step U: Analyzing the problem . Many
strong feelings date from a particular
incident where Jerry made an exception to
the restaurant T s food purchasing policy
without consulting other staff members/

or bad, whether they will work or not.
At this steD, ideas sho uld not be evalu-
ated . The purpose of brainstorming is to
v create a criticism- free atmosphere that
encourages people to be creative and to
express all their ideas spontaneously*
An idea that seems ridiculous may stimu-
late another one that is workable -
Shoot for quantity rather than quality.
Try to cover every possibility.

Step 6 : Evaluate the solutions of-
fered during the brainstorm. What needs
does each one fill or not fill? What
does implementation of different solu-
tions involve? What are the outcomes of
different courses of action? The cri-
teria for evaluation should cover both
f logical, concrete considerations and
also the feelings of the people involved,
A good decision Is one that is of high
quality in its own right, but is also
highly acceptable to those who must live
with it*

i
i

■

Try to select, out of all the ideas pro-
posed, the one that comes closest to
meeting everyone's needs. Perhaps a
creative new idea came up during the
brainstorm that will completely satisfy
everyone. If a single solution doesn't
immediately jump out as u the answer,"
however, the group has resources to work

with: a common understanding of needs,
a knowledge of what solutions are pos-
sible, and a list of specific ideas to
consider. Combine and reformulate these
ideas and continue working toward find-
ing a solution you can agree on. If the
two parties trust each other and are com-
mitted to each other's needs, they will
usually accept the solution which comes
closest to satisfying all concerned.

Step 7 : Once you reach agreement,
remember to decide how the solutio n will
be implemented , and how it will be re-
viewed and evaluated further down the
road. Kemember, too, that you need to
take some time to pat yourselves on the
backs and share good feelings about
finally coming to agreement* You will
deserve congratulations.

He was not aware of the historical rea-
son for this policy* When otters found
out, they were angry -

Another dynamic that emerged was the
difference in communication styles be-
tween Jerry and the rest of the group.
The present problem was allowed to scol-
der for a long time because Jerry never
talked to the others about his needs and
feelings. Jerry feels un co-nf or table
talking about feelings and he feels that
others are prying when they ask ques-
tions. His reaction to this situation
is to withdraw, which others interpret
as rejection and coldness on his part,

■

Step 5: Brainstorming . A few of
the very many ideas generated include:
Jerry leave the collective; Jerry stay
and everyone else leave; Jerry try to
change his style; other staff try to
adjust to Jerry as he is; a cos-promise
in which Jerry will agree to check all
his decisions with one other person —
Dcmia, with whom he has rapport. She
will decide if the rest of the staff
need to be consulted.

Step 6: Choosing a decision. The
collective realised that they did not
really dislike Jerry, but that they and
Jerry were happier when they communicated
and worked in different ways. fiAthar
than rejecting Jerry t the group began to
understand that he would be more satis-
fied in a different job situation.

Jerry recognised this as veil. Rather
than feeling rejected or discounted, he
felt supported by the group because they
were willing to understand and affirm
the validity of what he needed in a work-
ing situation. He agreed he should look
for another job. The group recognised
that Jerry had valuable skills and they
will give him good references and try to
help him make contacts. Until he finds
a job, he will reniain with the collective

On the surface, this decision appears to
be the same as if the group had simply
expelled Jerry, In accordance with their

original intention. In fact, there is a
great deal of difference. Tbe final de-
cision was not made in anger or mts trust,
but from a cooperative position in which
everyone tried to respond to eveiyone
elae 1 © needs. The collective feels satis*
fied with this decision and believes it
is the best one for all concerned. There
are no cariyover feeilnge of anger, re- "
sentment, or hostility,

Step 7: Wrapping up* Gaiy has vol*
unteered to put Jerry in touch vlth
several of the restaurant's regular cus-
tomers who might be in a position to
hire a good bookkeeper* A special meet-
ing has been planned where Jerry will
explain the specific frustrations of
the bookkeeper's job to a few of the .
staff members so they can make plans
that will taake the job easier for future
bookkeepers. The group plana to have
a party to celebrate Jerry * e new job as
soon as he finds one he wants to take.

MEDIATION

A second approach to dealing with con-
flicts in a structured way is one that
comes from the Radical Therapy movement,
and is best for interpersonal conflicts
between individuals. This process , called
"mediation, "is fairly structured and can
take from two to six hours in one or more
sessions. Mediation uses many of the
skills and principles discussed above,
under the guidance of a neutral and
trained third person.

We are presenting a brief outline of the
mediation process because we feel that
this chapter would be incomplete without
at least some mention of the technique.
We are convinced that the process can be
an extraordinarily useful and powerful
tool for interpersonal conflict resolu-
tion and problem solving. Mediation is
a difficult process, however, and it
confronts strong feelings. Before using
it, we believe you should be trained by
an experienced person. We recommend that

AAMVMVVMN

»*W*V

SUGGESTIONS TOR REORGANIZATION OF HANUAL ADDITIONAL SECTIONS + £t«M ft **;«nS *f

u n i*^ i ft c*\ m'£-*-> r^

1. What is consensus? Why should we use consensus - here's where the Advantages
should he given. Then follow by explanation of why we have problems- with it in this
society. Then brief explanation of values on which consensus ia baaed.

Then, come hack to values later on and intertwine them with how to put those values
in practice. Values are no good - unless can be Implemented ; make them applicable to
daily living*

2. Manual could be divided into two parts to givft it some organization: Theory -
including Introduction, Values inherent in Consensus, AM Problems with Consensus,
and advantages of consensus* *.and Practice - which contains the rest.

3. Do an introduction where we briefly refer to our values or reasons for doing 1-
the manual* Then go into definition, give background, do the step-by- step, go into
some of the problems, and then return to an outright discussion of values, It might
be much more convincing , more clear that one flows from the other.

A. We may want to omit talking about values separately at all, but to work them in
as they come up naturally. It would be viable especially in the practlcle section.

5. One other thought on the theory /practice idea: we could write it so that people
could skp over the theory section if they wanted to.

6. Integrate our process *f**6u^ha of developing this into the manual (chel has the
specifics) .

}

you do not try to follow the outline be-
low in an attempt to do a mediation.
We do hope that this brief presentation
will encourage some readers to further
explore the process, (See the reference
section at the end of this chapter.)

A mediation is appropriate when rela-
tions among two or more people are
strained to the point that the indi-
viduals are having trouble working to-
gether, JThepeoi^

jbgjiegotiafcg, toward so me comm on goal ^ bafr-
~ feel In gB^St^SB^err^arS^_ or. ^frilsSration
areTntef]^ their ability to do
their.. _own problem solving* The goal of
mediation is to "discuss the problem
openly , air the feelings, and agree to
specific behavioral changes* The medi-
ator helps the people in conflict go
through the following steps.

1. Agree about the outcomes. Do you
both want to be here? Is the issue
really negotiable? ' Are your goals com-
patible?

2. Clear the air* Express all the
resentments that distort your communi-
cation with each other. The feelings
that come out are likely to be intense
and volatile; the mediator helps make
it safe to feel, express and hear the
hurt and angiy feelings.

3. Check out assumptions. What are
your expectations and fears? Exchange
more information and clear more air,

k. Discuss perceptions of the prob-
lem. Talk about what you see happening.
Share insights and Intuitions.

5. Do a mutual critique of the prob-
lem. Focus on a critical analysis of
the problem, not the other person- Each
person can also look at how her or his
own actions and behaviors contribute to
the situation.

6, Ask for what you want. This step
incorporates both "wishing for 100JS of
what you want" and a friendly bargaining
approach. Explore all the possible op-
tions.

7* Make agreements about changes.
Make a "contract" to do things differ-
ently- Promise to work on specific be-
haviors that you both agree contribute
to the problem,

8, Share positive thoughts. Say what
you appreciate about each other and what
you like about each other, both in gener-
al and during this mediation session.

The mediation process can be extremely
helpful as a problem-solving tool for
people who are deadlocked in an inter-
personal conflict. The mediator can make
a safe atmosphere in which to speak to
each other while encouraging the expres-
sion of strong feelings that have been
impeding progress in the relationship.

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION by Alan
Filley

"Mediations *' by Anita Friedman

JOINING TOGETHER by David and Frank
Johnson

"Ate," Volume VII, No, k, "How to Handle
Conflict"

BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE COMMUNITIES^
Chapter 7, "Creative Conflict Re so-
lution , " by The Training/Action
Affinity Group

Chapter 11

Techniques for Group Building

Consensus decision making' works best
when the participants believe they belong 1

1 to the group, and the group belongs to

them* This group solidarity develops out
^ of mutu al trust^and respect, As trust
and respect grow wiCHETTKe group, mem-
bers will feel free to express opinions
and feelings, and to disagree without
fear of consequences. Many consensus
groups find that mu tual _ caring is im-
portant to their sense oTbeinTa group,

\ and they set aside time and plan activ-
ities to build friendships and develop a
sense of community,

Members 1 ability and willingness to take
Responsibility for the group is another
factor which contributes to the cohe-
siveness of groups. Taking responsibil-
ity means that each member contributes

to the functions of creating procedures
and rules, supporting each other , de-
fin jjig goals, evaluating progress, and
completing tasks. It is important for
members to know they can influence the
group.

Group building is the process by which
group solidarity or cohesiveness devel-
ops, A group does not instantaneously
come into being. It develops slowly
over time, Every _activi ty that is
shared_Jby_^oug^ members "~ whether it is
a business meeting,'" an office clean-up
party, an anniversary picnic, or hours
spent working together on a project,
contributes to the group's sense of
history and identity. In this sense,
the group grows out of, each member's
contributions. In consensus groups
it is particularly important that the
group f s growth be based on evolving
norms of open communication, coopera-
tion, and mutual trust and respect,
since these norms support the values
and skills of consensus. This chapter
will discuss some factors which con-
tribute to group solidarity and will
describe some techniques which you can
use in developing your group*

TAKE YODE GROUP SERIOUSLY

Individuals gather together for many
reasons: sharing concerns, discussing
philosophy, or working on a project.
Some of these gatherings may evolve into
groups, A group will emerge when its
members think of themselves as a group.
Two signs that a group has formed are:
members representing themselves publi-
cally as a group; and choosing a froup
name. (For example, people living to-
gether cooperatively will often name
their house, ) A group identity helps
to focus attention on what it means to
be a part of the group.

A group is a creation of its members*
It is important that group members spend
time considering the nature of the gro up:
What are the group's- goals? HowToesit
define member ship ? What are t he rules
fo r making d jgisigus?, If the rules and
goals of a~group develop. out of a con-
scious and cooperative effort, rather
than just "happening," then the group
will express the will of its members.
However, members must take the group
seriously for this to occur,

TaJcing the group seriously involves
more than accepting responsibility for
' choosing procedures and defining goals.
It also includes showing care and re-
spect for the group. Groups need spe-
cial attention during transitions (when
adding or losing members, when changing
procedures or roles) to ensure that the
changes contribute to the group's growth.

Say Hello and Good- Bye

It is important to acknowledge new mem-
bers when they enter the group as well
as noting when someone leaves the group.
A formal procedure for integrating new
members helps them feel accepted and
clarifies what is expected of them.
Such a procedure also helps old members
develop ties with newcomers- (See the
section belau entitled "Help New Members
Become Part of the Group. ")

When someone leaves the group * he or she
should be expected to make the depart lire
explicit rather than just "fading away."
Explicit leavetakings make it clear that
belonging to the group is something to be
taken seriously and that members have a
responsibility to each other to clarify
their roles.

Have Regular Evalua tions

Set aside time at the end of every meet-
ing {or on some regular basis) to talk
about how the meeting went, how members
feel about the process, and what might
be done differently in the future.
Evaluations help foster conscious group
development since they: 1) give members
a chance to affirm what they like about
the group and each other; 2) offer an
opportunity to clear up misunderstand-
ings; 3) give members who were dissatis-
fied with the process a chance to be
heard; k) provide a time for planning
improvements in the process to better
meet the needs of the group; and 5) af-
firm that the group takes itself seri-
ously since time is spent on the group l s
needs } not just projects.

When CCR held a neettng for an in-depfch
evaluation of our group process, we
learned that we all had been working so
hard on our group* a tasks, and on serving
other groups, that we were ignoring our-
selves and getting out of touch with each
other* We decided to call a temporary ■
moratorium on accepting any new work and
to focus Instead on discussing internal
Issues and goals* We also used this
time to emphasize our own "familial
dimension, ft A committee was formed to
develop ideas for bringing us all closer
together* These suggestions included a
"Resource Exchange" (everyone listed
skills and resources they could share
with other members of the group and the
lists were copied and passed out), and
small "Dinner Groups* 1 of four people
selected by drawing naines from a hat-
( These groups met for dljiner or other
purely social events over a period of a
couple months* )

i
i

It is also helpful to occasionally set
aside times for more in-depth evalua-
tions. A group may want to evaluate
how it worked on a specific project ^ how
it has worked over the past six months
or year, or whether politics, goals or
methods need to be refined. (See the
"Evaluations" section in Chapter 6^
STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS,, for sugges-
tions about how to conduct an evalua-
tion, )

SHARE RESPONSIBILITY

Members are most committed to a group
when they feel they are making an impor-
tant contribution, not just being led,
It is important to make sure that every
member has a chance to be active in the
group and to influence the direction
that the group takes* Members also need
to feel that other members are taking
active responsibility -and can be depend-
ed upon.

Balance Participation in Group Tasks

If a few members carry most of the weight
in a group while others feel helpless or
left out, there are specific techniques
a group can use to equalise participa-
tion. Usually the members who are assum-
ing more than their share of responsibil-
ity are eager to find a way to distribute
that responsibility more evenly, even if
they don T t know how to make this change.
Start by analysing why certain people
end up doing more. Do they have access
to more information or do they have more
experience than other people? Do con-
tacts from outside the group repeatedly
turn to certain individuals as repre-
sentatives of the group? Do members
automatically look to certain people for
leadership? Do less active members lack
confidence?

These patterns can be broken. Redis-
tribute tasks or information flow so

different people can get in the center
'of what's going on. Send new faces to

represent the group at the next press

conference or coalition meeting. Make

«r

INFORMATION POWER

,f In one group we know of , the bookkeeper
had a disproportionate amount of power at
meetings because, given her taow ledge of
the group 1 © financial situation, other
members had to rely on her opinion dur-
ing meetings about whether certain deci-
sions were financially feasible or not.
The books were not kept in a place where
Other members could gain access to this
in formation j so the power isbalance was
continued. "

■^

i^^^BB—

an effort in meetings to get different
people to talk, and listen to what they
say. Set up a time for in-services , when
a member with a special skill or exper-
tise can teach what he or she knows to
other group members*

Bala nce Participation at Meetings

It T s a rare group in which each member is
equally involved in each meeting, Dif-
ferent degrees of interest , information,
or styles of communication will result
in different levels of input during meet-
ings. Ideally, though, every member
should feel involved and free to contri-
bute. No one should dominate or monop-
olise, and no one should be left out.
Following are some guidelines and tech-
niques you can use to balance participa-
tion in meetings,

— Rotate roles such as notetaker,
facilitator, or other roles your group
may have established. This allows dif-
ferent people to share in leadership and
encourages everyone to develop a variety
of skills,

— Try to sit in a circle whenever pos-
sible so everyone can have eye contact
with everyone else. Circles tend to en-
courage more balanced participation and
prevent anyone from being at the lf head M
of the group physically,

— If some individuals consistently
tend to dominate discussion, you can
limit time per speaking turn, or limit
number of speaking turns per discussion.
Sometimes groups give each participant a
pile of mat chs ticks; each speaking turn
requires "payment" of a matchstick, thus
limiting each person's number of contri-
butions. Another technique is to pass a
token from hand to hand, giving the right
to speak only to the holder. At CCE we
have tried passing an egg timer from
speaker to speaker to encourage concise,
focused contributions,

— If some members are less assertive,
or participate less, you can use a "round
"robin, fT giving each member a turn to
state his or her opinion (with option to

1 pass}. In addition, the techniques of
brainstorming and the "travelling chair 11 .
can promote balanced participation.
(See the section entitled "Doing Discus-
sion" in Chapter 6* STRUCTURING YOUR MEET-
INGS \> for a fuller explanation of these
techniques* )

j ~ Even with the above techniques, perfect
balance in participation is unlikely to
occur. Some people are simply more ver-
bal than others. When group members get
to know who just naturally says a lot
and who only speaks up when it seems cru-
cially important, then members can make

* adjustments for individual differences.

Example: The group may know that
Gregg is shy and needs encouragement
to speak; Laura doesn't say much, but
can be counted on to get her point
across when she's ready; Paul usually
' speaks a lot and his reticence on a
particular occasion probably has some
significance which should be investi-
gated; and Vera needs feedback after
she presents an idea or she will keep
talking until Doomsday.

Since participation in the group will be
uneven, it is important for the members
to watch for patterns or consistencies
in imbalances. Do the women regularly
say less than the men? Do new members
participate less than older, established
members? Do young or middle-aged members
say less? Do people who have money in-
vested in the group say more? Such con-
sistencies, which often reflect societal
norms, may indicate incipient problems
for the group* It is easy to assume
that Karen, Sue and Deborah are quiet in
meetings because of the particular per-
sonal styles of these three individuals:
it might be more difficult, but accurate,
to recognise that women speak less in
your group than men. Such patterns can
be the result of societal conditioning
which is often so subtle that partici-
pants aren ! t aware of it. Perhaps women
speak less in your group because they have
been taught to be unassertive, or because
they have unconsciously realised that
when they do speak, their contributions
carry less weight than those of male mem-

•K

bers. Imbalances such as this should be
brought up at evaluation time so people
i can share insights and talk about how to
deal with them.

One group we've heard or developed a
technique for slowing down fast-paced
arguments and for equalising ths imbal-
ance in ae&ertivenegs between men and
f women, fchich wa£ a problem in their
group* After a speaker had finished
talking, women members had to count to
five before they could respond, Man had
to count to ten.

In consensus, decisions are made by talk-
ing about an issue until agreement is
reached. Therefore, verbal skills and
the confidence to use those skills are
essential. Lack of skills or confidence
y can be responsible for both under-
participation and over-participation at
meetings. Members may be afraid to take
the risk of speaking up, or they may
»- speak incessently because they are afraid
Icthey are not being heard and understood,
'In both cases, the members 1 ability to
contribute to the group is decreased.
The group as a whole is responsible for
creating a supportive atmosphere and en-
suring opportunities for all members to
learn necessary skills.

Both under-participating and over-
participating members can be assisted
in improving their skills. Make it clear
what you want them to learn to do and
^ encourage a group atmosphere that sup-
ports their learning to change rather
than being intimidating or critical.
One way to help under-participating mem-
bers is to ask specific questions when
you think their contribution would be of
value.

Example: You might say, "Dan, when ue
were having lunch yesterday, you made
a good observation about our group
process* Would you mind explaining it
to the whole group?" — "Valerie, I've
heard what everyone thinks about my
proposal except you. I really want to
know your opinion. "

Let people know when their comments have
j been valuable , and give them feedback
that will help improve their skills.

Example: "Ann, I realize we all re-
sponded defensively when you criti-
cized our newsletter, and that made it
hard for us to be open to what you
were saying, I think we would have
responded better if you had started
out by saying you had a few ideas
about how to improve the newsletter,
rather than saying it was no good as
it is now, "

The most helpful feedback describes spe-
y cific behaviors to change.

Example: Instead of blaming Clara for
her long, rambling comments, a member
could say, "Clara, next time, before
you speak, try stopping to think pre-
cisely what point you want to make.
Then make that clear first thing.
That way we won T t be confused or frus-
trated trying to follow your thoughts,
(See "Feedback and Criticism" in Chap-
ter 5, COMMUNICATION SKILLS. )

You can also help people during discus-
sions .

Example: You can say, "Ben, are you
saying you are worried about the bad
press this project might get us?
v Thank you for bringing that up — it's
an important point to consider. ,T
This type of statement can cut through
meandering comments and help Ben see
a precise way to make his point. At
the same time, the importance of Ben T s
contribution is acknowledged.

^ Developing better communication skills
is a shared concern of the group. An
individual who feels blamed for a prob-
lem and who is left alone with the re-
sponsibility for learning to change,

^will probably not change at all. In-
dividuals need emotional support- and

x c onstructive _jree dbac k from the group in
order to behave differently. It is im-
portant to remember that the process of
helping individuals change strengthens
the group as a whole.

ENCOURAGE SOCIAL INTERACTION

Build Fm Into Meetings

During its development, every group must
go through an initial period of social
interaction in which members get to know
each other as individuals apart from the
task of the group. In addition, every
meeting usually begins with a period of
social time where people catch up with
each other and reaffirm their relation-
ships. It is wise to recognize the
necessity of such interaction and build
it into your group T s life: allow time
for friendship as well as for work. Be-
low are some techniques for channeling
social energy into your group building
process,

At the Beginning of Meetings

People need time to talk personally with
each other before beginning business mat-
ters. If members arrive at 7 o r clock,
don't expect business to begin until
7:10 or even later. It just won't hap-
pen, and if people are forced to start
working without any social time, they
will probably get distracted by social
interaction during business,

Some groups actually acknowledge this
social time by having two m eeting times ,
one for "gathering," perhaps including
dinner or refreshments, and a second
time for business to begin. You may also
want to formalise this interaction time
within the context of the meeting. If
the group is meeting for the first time,
begin with introductions. An ongoing
group should repeat this process when-
ever new members attend meetings: it
makes the new people feel recognized and
welcomed, and it can serve as a basis
for getting acquainted later. For on-
going groups, a check- in procedure is
often valuable. Each member takes a few
moments to tell how they are, what they
have been doing since the last meeting,
something they are excited about, or
other anecdotes. This technique has the
added advantage of uncovering "hidden
agendas" in advance, (Gary can warn the
group that he has a headache and may be
irritable. )

Having fun together can bring group mem-
bers closer together, if fun is struc-
tured in such a way that it doesn T t com-
pletely disrupt the business of the meet-
ing. In addition to ice cream breaks,
meeting at the swimming pool, or any
other sources of fun you can come up
with, you may want to try " Light and
Liveliest 1 These are quick, playful
f activities that can wake people up and
break up tension or monotony* Some
examples include:

— Group Stretch : Everyone stands and
follows the motions of a leader.

— Magic Blob : An imaginary, protean
,T blob" is passed around the circle. Each
person takes it from the previous person

in one shape, but passes it to the next
person in a new form* For example, when
John passes the blob to Cathy, it is a
piece of stretchy taffy* In Cathy's

"Somebody in our local Hovement for a New
Society group here told one meeting
about another HNS group that had estab-
lished a 'frivolity committee 1 whose task
was to make spontaneous light and lively
Interventions during meetings. While we
did not establish a formal frivolity
committee here* several of us quietly
took on this task for one of our monthly
meetings- During the middle of one of
our meetings , we unexpectedly got bogged
down in a very heavy and time-consuming
decision-making discussion* Without an-
nouceaent, three of ue leaped to our
feet and began to einjj (and act out) the
first verse of the *Hokey-Pokey. ! Uie
other participants were startled and
alao leaped to their feet without think-
ing about what was happening* Within
seconds, the entire group was doing the
1 Hokey-Pokey* * The activity finished,
we resumed our discussion with our heads
aore clear and -with a sense of freshness
in our interactions, 1 *

— JIjb Strurve

hands it turns Into a bouncing ball.
But when Gary catches the ball on a
dribble j it becomes a very heavy bar-
bell.

— Touch Blue : The group stands to-
gether. When the game leader shouts,
"touch blue," everyone must find some-
thing blue on another person and touch
it as quickly as possible. Then "touch
purple/ 1 "touch polka dots," "touch a
leather belt," "touch curly hair, 11

— Human Pretzels : The group stands
in a circle. Each person reaches across
the circle with both hands (not crossed)
and grasps hands with two different
people. Then, without letting go, try
to untangle. If you are lucky, you may
find yourselves in a reassembled circle
with everyone holding hands with the
person next to them.

— Role Playing : Agenda items do not
always have to be presented in a serious ,
factual manner. People can take on
roles and act out reports to the group,
problems for discussion, etc. Role play-
ing provides some comic relief to the
meeting and puts things back in perspec-
tive when they have become overly serious

Get Together Just for Fun

Picnics, potlucks, volleyball games, etc,
are a good way to bring together socially
people who normally meet just to do work.
Such gatherings help members become
friends as well as co-workers and in-
crease their sense of involvement with
the group. These gatherings are also a
good time to meet each others 1 friends
and families and to visit each other's
homes ,

INCREASE INVOLVEMENT AND TRUST

Throughout this manual, we stress the
importance of trust among members of a
w group. Trust is a difficult quality to

build in its own right. It usually de-
velops only after group members have
shared activities together which increase
their mutual understanding, caring and
respect. Group members don T t have to
always be in agreement to trust each
other. However members do need to know
that s despite differences, others will
* respect them, will be fair with them,
and will care about their feelings.

The more that communication occurs be-
tween members , and the better they get
to Imow each other, the better the chance
of developing trust. Following are a
few specific exercises that your group
can use to increase mutual understanding,
and to give members an opportunity to
develop the personal relationships you
already have with each other. Many
other activities are described in the
references at the end of this chapter .

Reflections

Divide into pairs. Pairs may work sep-
arately, or they may work with another
pair, each pair observing the other to
Increase members 1 opportunities for
learning more about each other,

A facilitator should provide a simple,
but personal question- (E.g., "What do
I value about this group?" "What are my
frustrations with this group?" "Where do
I want to be five years from now?" "How
do I feel about changes I see happening
in this group, this city, the world?")

Now one member (Paul) should answer the
question as he thinks his partner
(Claudia) would answer it, Claudia
should listen to Paul, then tell him how
his answer is like or different from what
her answer really would have been. The
two participants may want to have an in-
formal discussion about why Paul drew
certain conclusions, how Claudia felt
about hearing them, or how Paul felt
about guessing right or wrong.
Then reverse roles and have Claudia tell
Paul what she thinks his answer to the
question would be.

—Variation I: Use the above exercise
in relation to a difficult issue or
disagreement in the group. For example,
In preparation for problem solving about
a conflict between Claudia and Paul, the
exercise can help each person understand
the other's perspective better and iden-
tify potential misunderstandings.

—Variation II: This exercise can be
adapted to practice paraphrasing.

Claudia gives her own answer to the ques-
tion, then Paul restates, in his own
words, what he believes Claudia said.
This activity develops good listening
skills and increases members' awareness
of the communication problems which can
arise when a speaker's statement is
misunderstood.

■

Dyadic Ri sk Taking (Adapted from Pfeiffer
and Jones) /

Divide into pairs, Paul tells Claudia
something personal about himself. It can
be an extremely risky disclosure {some-
thing that is hard to reveal), or it can
be very safe (something easy to talk
about), or somewhere in between. Paul
might say, "I have a dog named Pepper,"
"I have $700 in the bank," "I am ashamed
of my voice and I try to avoid situations
where I would be expected to sing," or
"Last week I spent a whole evening read-
ing a Gothic novel . "

Now Claudia makes a judgment about how
risky the statement was for Paul to make
(0 = no risk; 1 = minimal risk; 2 = mild
risk; and 3 = a pretty big risk).
Claudia writes down her score and does
not show it to Paul*

Then Claudia makes a personal statement
and Paul records the amount of risk he
judges that statement to be.

After each person has made five state-
ments, they show each other the risk
scores and discuss their perceptions
with each other. Why were certain state-
ments risky and others not? Were there
any big differences between what the two
people thought was risky? What are the
reasons for these differences? Did it
become more -or less risky to make state-
ments as the exercise proceeded? Why?

Hints: It helps to sit side-by-side so
members can regulate how much they want
to look at each other during the exercise
Also, during the exercise, participants
should not respond to each other's state-
ments, but merely score them and then
make a statement of their own.

Positive Feedback

Each member receives a slip of paper or
index card for every other member of the
group » Participants are instructed to
write a positive statement or "message
of happiness" for each group member on
the separate slips of paper. Some
guidelines are: 1) write messages that
begin with ,r I n ( ,r I like , . , " — r! I
feel . . ,"); 2) be specific ("I like the
way you smile at everyone," rather than,
"I like your attitude."); 3) write a
special message to fit each person rath-
* er than a comment that could apply to
several people. Members can sign their
messages or leave them anonymous.

Each participant designates a certain
place as their "mailbox" and people dis-
tribute their messages to the appropri-
ate boxes*

When all messages have been delivered
^and read, participants are iavited to
share feedback that was most meaning-
ful to them, clarify any ambiguous mes-
sages, and express the feelings they
have experienced during the process,

— Variation: Instead of written
messages , members could be asked to
bring small, meaningful presents for
each other to some meeting or special
occasion.

Most Precious Possession

This exercise could begin or end a regu-
lar meeting, or it might be part of a
special session for building group com-
munication. Each member brings their
"most precious possession" and, with-
out showing it to the others, places it
in a box designated for this purpose.

Later, each item is taken out, one by
one, and the group tries to guess who
the object belongs to. After the ob-
jects have all been taken out and guesses
made, owners claim their objects and tell
the group why they are precious- Par-
ticipants are encouraged to talk about
their feelings and what they have
learned about each other and themselves,

— Variation I: Instead of objects,
you may want to use drawings that people
have made, pictures cut out from maga-
zines that members feel are meaningful
or expressive of themselves, verses of
poetry, quotations, names of famous
people who have been a source of inspi-
ration, etc,

— Variation II: Members might instead
bring some symbolic object that they want
to get rid of (the blue jeans that are
too big since you finally lost weight,
the resume you used -job hunting in an
area of work you have decided to give up,
etc). After sharing the objects with
each other, you might want to build a
bonfire and burn them* This could be a
joyful activity celebrating positive
changes you are making in your lives,

Trust Walk

Members pair up. One partner is blind-
folded and the second partner leads him
or her on a walk outside. The sighted
partner makes sure that the blindfolded
one is safe and does not stumble or bump
into anything, trying to reassure the
blindfolded person if he or she is ner-
vous, Then trade roles. Afterwards,
members talk with each other about how
the exercise felt.

I Mi leal writes

►

^^^^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^

re:

p, 9/a

The intro. fs a bit moralistic for my taste, I would emphasize Cons,
as a process oriented towards a wbold new cla ss or problems — hisoricalW
generated — namely, ones demanding solutions for which there is no tradi-
tional model. Hence creativity demanded.

*WN*N *AN *SVSV*

HELP NEW MEMBERS
BECOME PART OF THE GROUP

Providing a framework for new people to
become fully integrated members is an
important concern for any group* It is
an especially sensitive issue in groups
which make decisions by consensus be-
cause in such groups each member has a
great deal of power to affect the ac-
tions of the rest of the group. This
individual power is the reason we think
consensus is a good process* However
there can be trouble when a new member
is inexperienced with consensus and
doesn't yet know how to use it well.
Even if a new member is familiar with
consensus, lack of knowledge about the
group, its history and its goals, could
cause problems. For this reason, many
groups which use consensus are cautious
about who they allow to join or how they
integrate new members. Your group should
seriously consider; Who can be a member
and how will new- members be integrated
into the group? What will we do to give
new members the skills and the knowledge
they need to participate well?

■ ■

It is important to consider how new mem-
bers develop a sense of belonging and
acceptance in the group. New members
need to feel wanted and welcomed* They
need to be given access to information
they will need to participate in the
group so they can feel like "insiders, u
(Where are materials kept in the office?
Why do we always meet on the East Side
of town? What is that "in" joke about
MacDonald's? Who is Howie Drewick and
why does everyone growl when his name
is mentioned? Why is a procedure done
this way instead of that other, obvi-
ously more efficient way?)

If older members don't make an effort to
become acquainted with new members and
to incorporate them into the group, then
the experience of being new can be frus-
trating, lonely and alienating* For
example, if clear guidelines for appro-
priate group behavior are not available,
then new members can only learn by making
mistakes, by violating group norms and

procedures- This can lead to a steady
stream of negative comments from older
to newer members — a situation likely to
convince newcomers they are unwelcome or
inept. New members can also be bewil-
dered by being told of a "rule/ and then
seeing other members break that rule.
They need to know when, how and why
certain regulations are sometimes ig-
nored.

Even when new members are welcomed, it
can be difficult for older members to
give them the necessary time and support.
Older members are busy with the group T s
work and with their friendships with
each other. It can be difficult to spend
adequate time with new people. Also,
it f s hard to know how to relate to an
unknown quantity.

Without realizing it, older members might
perceive new members as a threat to group
stability, A new member might bring
change to a group which older members
love, or understand, just the way it
is, A complaint we heard from a new mem-
ber at CCR was, "Every time I suggest
a new idea, someone says, T 0h, we tried
that two years ago*" I feel like people
aren't open to considering what I have
to offer." It is easy to assume that be-
cause someone is new, he or she doesn't
have anything valuable to give the group
yet. Sometimes, however, a person will
have a creative idea or a fresh perspec-
tive just because they have a different
background of experiences than the one
shared by the older group members. It is
a mistake to discount these new ideas
(or revitalised old ideas) too quickly.

There are specific things your group can
do to facilitate the process of bringing
in new members. These suggestions may
not make the experience easy for new-
comers, but they can clarify what is ex-
pected of new members and what new mem-
bers can expect of the group. Your
process may also include a specific pro-
cedure for phasing out new members if
they don't work out. Following are a few
ideas.

* VVVV V V M VW Si S * * AN***^WS

•

I found myself frustrated because I was doing the greater part of the
clerical work 1n the office* One of the reasons I was getting stuck with this
work {a process 1n which I also played a part] , was that I knew better than others
how to do this work: where things were kept, all the little details* etc. To
get myself out of this role, and to enable others to do 1t, I wrote an "Office
Procedures Manual" about how to do everything in the office. Son* people never
used 1t» but a lot of people did and 1t had the effect I'd wanted of freeing me

■

from so much of this responsibility. But later a new member to the group told
me (in a nice way) that she thought this book was an Instrument of oppression.
Whenever she asked group members where to find something, or how to do something,
instead of responding to her in a personal way, they would brush her off, saying,
"Look 1n the Procedures Manual. M J \ t U^O* ^^ U ^^J££^

^ ^ M^ * M *** M »

*^ ^^ * W

1, Introduce new' members at meetings.
Let them say why they are interested in
the group, what they want from it, what
they can give it. The more old members
know about the new ones, the more basis
they will have for trying to get to know
them- Make a point, also, to introduce
all the old members to a new member,

2, Formalize the process of extend-
ing Information to new people* Have a
special orientation session for them.

Or have something written for new people
which tells about the group and how to
perform various task functions.

3, Provide each new member with a
"buddy" — someone who will take extra
trouble to help out, someone to go to
with questions, someone other members
can go through if they want to give
feedback to the new member and don't
Imow him or her well enough yet to do
it more directly.

k* Try bringing new members in in
bunches, or "flocks." Two, three or
four new people can give each other sup-
port and work through the period of

strangeness together.

5- At CCR, a new member is an "intern"
for the first three months. An intern has
the same responsibilities as other group
members and takes part in decision-making
discussions. But he or she cannot block
consensus, After the internship period,
there is an evaluation for the intern at
one of the regular staff meetings, (Most
interns ask for this evaluation: they
feel a need for feedback from the group,
want a chance to give their own feedback,
and this step formalises the group's
recognition of the new person as an inte-
grated member. Older members may also
ask for an evaluation at this time. )
After the evaluation, the intern usually
"flies up" to full membership. Occasion-
ally someone may be asked to remain an
intern awhile longer , or to leave. But
if a new member isn't working out with
the group, he or she usually loses inter-
est and leaves during the internship.

6. You might want to have a "clear-
i ness meeting" to explore with a new per-
son why he or she wants to be in the
group, what mutual expectations are, and
how to deal with any anticipated prob-

Such a meeting could be held when

■-
■■

a person first considers joining a group,
at the end of an internship period, or

both-

7. Have scheduled check- ins or up-
dates with new people. Ask them how
they are feeling about their role in the
group. What do they need from other
members to make things easier?

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

"The Agony of Inequality tf by Jane J,
Mansbridge in CO~OPS 3 COMMUNES AND
COLLECTIVES by John Case and Rosemary
Taylor, eds.

RESOURCE MANUAL FOR A LIVING REVOLUTION

by Virginia Coover, et al.

"The Bases of Social Power" by J.R.P.
French and B. Raven in STUDIES IN
SOCIAL POWER by D. Cartwright, ed,

THE NEW GAMES BOOR- by Andrew Fluegelman,
ed.

FOR THE FUN OF IT! by Marta Harrison

JOINING TOGETHER by David and Frank
Johnson

A HANDBOOK OF STRUCTURED EXPERIENCES FOR
HUMAN RELATIONS TRAINING by J. William
Pfeiffer and John Jones, eds.

CLEARNESS by Peter Woodrow

YMfc

"Qua vK1/ u

i ^ ^^^ AW^A^^^ ^^ ^^ VW W W W V

* AA *A*^ ^ S * ^ ^ ^ ^^^^ ^^^^* ^ ^ WW^W ^

Chapter 12

Adaptations of the Process for
Special Situations

The consensus process described so far
works best in small, homogeneous groups
where members share common goals and
values, have a high level of trust, and
have plenty of time and patience. Con-
sensus can sometimes work effectively In
other situations, however — in large, di-
verse groups of people and under tight
time constraints.

In large groups, the sheer numbers of
participants may prevent everyone from
having a say in a meeting of the whole
group. The use of small groups for part
of the discussion, and using representa-
tives, can facilitate decision making
so that many of the advantages of "pure"
consensus decision making can be pre-
served.

Even when the group is small, time pres-
sures can sometimes make full blown con-
sensus decision making impossible. In
such cases, provisions for an "escape
clause" for voting, or special techniques
^for speeding the decision along may al-
low the group to keep some of the im-
portant elements of consensus. In this
chapter we will describe some techniques
for adapting the consensus process in
special situations.

FORMALIZED PROCESS

When the group is large, when time is
tight, or when the subject being dis-
cussed is highly controversial or emo-
tional, the group may want to use a
formal structure for the discussion.
In such cases, the facilitator plays a
strongly directive role, determines who
speaks when, and exercises rigid con-
straints on the discussion, making sure
that only pertinent issues are discussed
and that all talk is succinct and to the
point. Some specific techniques for
formalized process are described below.

-1

Stacking

Members wishing to speak must raise their
bands and the facilitator acknowledges
them in order. For instance, if five
people raise their hands at once, the
facilitator might say, "Karen first, then
Don, Anna, Joan, and Steve." As these
people speak , others wanting turns raise
their hands and the facilitator puts
their names on a mental or written list,
then indicates in order whose turn is
next. Often two people will want to
make the same point, so when it comes to
Steve's turn, he may just say, "I was
going to say what Anna said," or "I pass.

■

An advantage of stacking is that partici-
pation is well equalised- However the
issues raised may not get the discussion
they need when it is appropriate. When
a discussion is heated, sometimes people
become so eager to speak or respond to
each other that it becomes difficult to
attend to what other people are saying.
In such situations you might want to use
a further variation of stacking which
allows limited back- and- forth discussion
to proceed after each person in the stack
speaks. This discussion must be guided
by directive facilitation (possibly using
two facilitators) so it doesn ! t get out
of control. After the limited exchange,
the facilitator calls on the next person
in the stack.

Even during ordinary stacking, it is
sometimes necessary to interrupt the
regular flow of turn taking. Such in-
terruptions are allowed when a member
has some information unknown to the rest
of the group that is relevant to what
another speaker is saying* {The point
must be strictly informational, not opin-
ion, and it should be immediately rele-
vant and necessary to the discussion. }
The person with the information says to
the facilitator, "I have a point of in-
formation," and is allowed to interject
that information, briefly and concisely,
before the group returns to the turn-
taking sequence.

Similarly, it may sometimes be necessary
to interrupt the stacking process with a

"point of process," such as, n I think the
group should know, we only have ten min-
utes left," or "This discussion is get-
ting too personal. We have to get back
to the issue,"

Using Silence

It is often helpful for the facilitator to
call for a moment of silence so group mem-
bers can slow down a heated exchange. By
interrupting such an interaction, silence
can help people remember that it isn T t
, necessary to respond to every statement
they disagree with, and it isn't neces-
sary to repeat points that have been
stated earlier. It is necessary, though,
for all important viewpoints to be aired
in a calm atmosphere where everything
said will be remembered and considered*

Time Limits

Another technique for formalizing and
speeding up discussion in large groups,
or when an issue is volatile, is to have
time limits for how long each person may
speak. For instance, the facilitator may
allow everyone who wants to make a state-
* ment to do so, but with a limitation of
two minutes. Such limits force speakers
to be concise, to emphasise only what is
most important, and not to get drawn into
long, rhetorical arguments or rebuttals
of previous speakers.

Proposals and Amendments

In a more casual situation, decisions
will often "evolve" out of discussion.
In formal situations, or when discussion
seems to be scattered over a number of
issues so that areas of agreement aren't
- clear, a group member may, at some point,
make a specific proposal.

Example: "I propose we go ahead and
hire John for three months and make
one of the duties of his job to be
trying to find funding to hire two
more people after the summer, "

A proposal of this kind is best made
only after some discussion of the issue
has occurred, most viewpoints and rele-

vf ^ information have been aired, and
th* cime seems right to organise the
group's thoughts into a decision* After
the proposal is made, more discussion
should occur as the group reacts to it.
If the reaction seems positive, the
facilitator may ask, !1 Are there any
objections to this proposal?" If there
are not, the decision is final, (Make
sure the proposal is repeated fully, so
members are sure about what they are
agreeing to - )

A member may be willing to accept a pro-
posal with minor alterations and may
offer a "friendly amendment."

Example: "I can go along with the
proposal, but I r d like to add the
stipulation that after six weeks we
have a meeting with John to review
the work he is doing and how things
are working out. At that time we
may decide to change the M terms of
his employment . " ♦ "

otes

Straw voting is an informal, non-binding
show of hands to test the number of
people in a group who support a particu-
lar decision. The technique is contro-
versial among those who use consensus.
Some people feel that any kind of voting
may become a form of tyranny by numbers
or may be used to single out dissenters
and put pressure on them. However there
are some advantages of straw voting in
certain situations that may justify its
use. First, In extremely large groups,
it is often difficult to tell whether
long, drawn-out discussion represents
serious disagreement, or if participants
are merely raising all the issues and
expressing opinions. A straw vote may
be used to estimate how close the group
is to consensus, and whether it is time
to start struggling to finalise a deci-
sion , or whether much more discussion is
necessary. Secondly, in large groups,
many people do not have a turn to speak.
A strajw vote Is a way for silent people
to til .press their opinions and feel that
they are being given a chance to have
input. If this technique is used, the

facilitator should make it clear that
the straw vote is not a change to ma-
jority rule, but merely a way of testing
the current state of agreement or disa-
greement in the group, and of identifying
the most serious objections for further
discussion.

Multiple Facilitators

In the kinds of situations described in
this chapter, the role of facilitator
can be highly demanding, requiring close
attention and vigilance. In such cases,
it is especially useful to have two
facilitators. One may act as timekeeper
while the other plays process observer,
or one may handle stacking, while the
other attends to clarifying the subject
being discussed. If one facilitator
gets tired or becomes emotionally em-
broiled, the second can step in and pro-
vide support.

A Word on Versatility

Many groups vacillate between the formal
process described here and a more easy-
going, informal process- The facilitator
of a particular meeting may play an unob-
trusive, back-seat role when things are
going smoothly, but may step forward and
offer more formalized direction when it
seems needed. It is helpful for groups
to be skilled in both informal and formal
process and to have the versatility to
switch back and forth as the situation
demands.

■ REPRESENTATIVE CONSENSUS DECISION MAKING

Sometimes a group of hundreds of people
can operate by consensus using a repre-
sentative method. The Clamshell Alliance
(an anti-nuclear action coalition) uses
a method that involves dividing a very
large group into small units known as
' "affinity groups.' 1 Affinity groups con-
sist of eight to 15 people who work to-
gether closely over a period of time.
They develop the mutual trust and under-
standing and the common knowledge and
experiences necessary for good consensus
decision making. When the larger group

needs to make a decision, each of the
affinity groups meets and discusses the
matter (see diagram). Each affinity
group sends a representative (known as
a "spoke") to a "spokes meeting." This
meeting of representatives discusses
the issue and comes up with one or more
proposals. The spokes then return to
their affinity groups where the proposal
is discussed. Then spokes go back to
the spokes meeting with feedback from
their groups and acceptance or rejection
of the proposal.

To finalise a decision^ the spokes must
reach consensus. Each spoke represents
a group which in turn must come to con-
sensus on what decision it wants its
spoke to support. Therefore, each person
in the large group has a chance to block
consensus within the affinity group and
through the group's spoke. If a proposal
of the spokes meeting is rejected, the
matter is discussed again, the reasons
for rejection are aired,' and a new pro-

posal is developed. The back- and- for th
process between meetings of affinity
groups and spokes meetings continues
until consensus is reached. This pro-
cess is long and arduous , but it ensures
that decisions represent input from
everyone in the group. Reaching a deci-
sion sometimes takes many hours, but
people who have used this method have
generally found it worth the trouble.

THE MAJORITY RULE ESCAPE CLAUSE

Many groups which prefer to make most of
their decisions by consensus have an al-
ternative process in reserve — a majority
rule "escape clause" — which can be used
when consensus fails to produce a deci-
sion quickly enough for the needs of the
group. We will describe some of these
procedures below and then briefly address
the arguments for and against having such
an escape clause*

4m#ffV

e&coe

( AFftrtifY (#oQ? \

*h.

S?0 K £ -5 f^f^-^ord

^ 6&jp J

***w£

AR2N£1> AT PPOP05AL

tat- )■*-

5 po*

t6?

* *

■ ■

Ne=W PROP05AI

PFDFJP5AL- AFPpO\/&?

COMS&&3S DgUSlQM MAkiKifc

100

-7

The Majority Rule Escape Hatch

Martha T s Rules of Order

This method comes from a paper entitled,
"Suggestions for Harmonious Meeting s, ,r
affectionately known as "Martha's Rules
of Order* 11 It was developed by a coop-
erative household called "Martha 1 s" in
Madison, Wisconsin. The purpose of the
process is stated: "We recognize that
consensus decision making, while it
takes a lot of time, makes for high
quality decisions. But some decisions
are not worth the effort* So we devel-
oped a way to decide whether or not an
issue was important enough to warrant
taking the extra time to reach consen-

sus.

After an issue is discussed, a formal
proposal is presented, and a preliminary
show of hands is called for:

— Who likes the proposal?

— Who can live with the proposal?

— Who is uncomfortable with the pro-
posal?

If no one is uncomfortable, the decision
is implemented. If some members are un-
comfortable, they are asked to state why
and there is a discussion. Then a vote
is taken on the following question:

"Should we implement this decision
over the stated objections of the
minority, when a majority of the
people in the house feel it is
workable?"

A "yes" vote leads to majority rule. A
"no rf vote means postponing the decision
until consensus can be reached through
further discussion*

The Bailly M ethod

This method was used by the Bailly Alli-
ance of Chicago, a former anti-nuclear
group in the Midwest- When consgnsug

could not be reached, members would vote
{, on whether to revert to majority rule.
A three- fourths majority was necessary
in order to revert to voting , and a
three- fourths majority was necessary to
finalize any decision when this happened-

Elaine's Alternative

, ' *-

A more elaborate process with a similar
"escape" goes like this:

1. The group reaches consensus on
the definition of the problem before dis-
cussing solutions*

2, An ample but defined time period
is set for airing and discussing the
proposals, including questions and clari-
fication,

3* When major objections arise, the
group breaks into small groups for the
purpose of creating amendments, resolu-
tions or new proposals. Participants
then return to the larger group to dis-
cuss, prioritize, and select resolutions.

It:, If there is still no consensus,
the objectors are asked if they will
step aside and allow the decision to be
adopted if:

— Their dissenting ideas are
recorded.

— It is stipulated that the deci-
sion does not set a precedent and cannot
be used as a basis for future decisions.

101

■

--It is implemented for a trial
period, with a well-defined set of cri-
teria for evaluation .

5< If the objectors refuse , a commit-
tee is formed containing an equal number
of members representing each opinion*
The committee's assignment is to develop
a new proposal within a set period of
time. Their proposal is brought back
to the group for a final decision,

6. If consensus cannot be reached on
the new proposal, then the group tries
to reach consensus to go to a three-
fourths majority vote.

7. As a very last resort , three-
fourths of the group may vote to decide
by a three- fourths majority vote*

Pros and Cons of the Escape Clause

■ ■ ' — ■ — ■ ■

We conclude these descriptions of the
majority rule escape clause with the
following points. On the positive side
one can say that in most groups the
"clause rT is rarely used, and that it
takes off some of the pressure the grou]
feels by knowing that they must come to
full consensus. Time pressures are,
after all, one of the realities that a
group must deal with* and sometimes the
escape clause provides the group with a
legitimate response to time problems.
Especially when the group is inexperi-
enced with consensus and is having dif-
ficulties working with it, an escape
clause may be the only way of avoiding
frustrations that would lead them to
abandon consensus altogether.

On the other hand, some believe that time
pressure is often good for a group since
it forces members to learn to work to-
gether well enough to use consensus on
a regular basis* When an escape clause
exists, those in the majority position
may be tempted to take the easy way out
rather than giving serious consideration
to the opinions of those in the minority.

102

THE MINORITY RULE ESCAPE CLAUSE

The Wisconsin Womyn's Land Cooperative,
a living and recreational farm for women
and children, uses consensus* But they
have also developed a special conflict
resolution procedure for addressing issues
of strongly diverse opinions, and for
formulating difficult policy decisions.
The procedure includes pre- meeting prepa-
rations for individuals, in which women
explore their own perspectives, contra^
dictions j and interests. Then the special
conflict resolution meeting is held, us-
ing principles of consensus, criticism/
self-criticism, and maximum participation.

The unique feature of the process is the
"Provision of Last Resource." If, after
thoroughly discussing and exploring the
issues, no consensus can be reached, the
decision is delegated to a smaller group
of people. The subgroup members must
represent all the perspectives, and they
are chosen and agreed to by all. They
must be ongoing organisation members,
well versed in consensus and criticism
skills, and they are expected to be
flexible and to change in the course of
their further work together. No later
substitutions are allowed for those as-
signed to the small group. These women

meet until they reach consensus , and
their decision is binding for the whole
group*

A potential problem with this method
is that without very thorough report-
ing to the large group of both the con-

tent and process of the small group r s
work, some members of the larger group
may not be satisfied by or even under-
stand the final decision. An advan-
tage, however, is that it does allow
a thorough attack on the problem:
representatives of all positions work
until opposing views are resolved into

FGRC MEETING PROCESS

The procedure below is adapted from a
process developed by the Federation of
Ohio River Cooperatives for use in large
organizational meetings*

1* A proposal is presented to the
entire group.

2- The large group breaks into small
groups which "buzz," or quickly talk, to
bring up any questions necessary to clari
fy the proposal,

3* A meeting of the large group polls
representatives of the small groups for
clarifying questions and answers are pro-
vided.

k.-4 One minute of silence is allowed
for participants to consider the proposal

5, The small groups meet to die cuss
the proposal. Do participants want to
accept it, offer friendly amendments ,
voice strong disagreements or aajor ob-
jections?

6, In the large group, the small
groups are polled for their reactions.
If there Is a major objection, proceed
to step 7, if not, skip to step 8.

7, a* Small groups buzz to come up
with suggestions to resolve objections,
or vith further creative suggestions.

b. The large group polls the' sisall
group for results of 7. a.

c+ Again, small groups bu&z for
one minute about their reactions to ideas
expressed during 7*b.

d. In the large group, facili-
tators asfc whether objections have been
met by the suggestions made above*

3* Small groups talk again to
consider members 1 feelings about the
proposal and added suggestions. Facili-
tators join groups where objections
exist.

8. In the large group, concerns are
prioritized and amendments combined to
produce a new proposal.

9, Small groups buzz for clarifying
questions about the proposal developed
under Step 8,

10. In the large group a poll is taken
for clariiyiag questions a and answers are
given,

11. Small groups discuss whether they
can support the proposal as revised.

12* There Is a test for consensus in
tha small groups*

13* In the large group M the revised
proposal is read again.

lk m A test for consensus is held" in
the entire group*

103

a mutually satisfactory solution with-
out requiring the entire group to
spend time on the potentially arduous
process*

TEE "CONSENSUS-TRUST" CONVENTION MODEL

The feminist movement is developing an
alternative to Robert f s Rules of Order
for large meetings where parliamentary
procedure would traditionally be used.
The "Consensus-Trust" model was first
tested successfully at the founding con-
vention of the National Women's Studies
Association in 1977, which over 700 people
attended* It was modified and used by a
smaller group of about 50 at the first
Wisconsin State Convention of the National
Lesbian Feminist Organisation in 1978.

The model is used at meetings whose pur-
pose is to pass resolutions that will
stand as policies or platforms for the
organic at ion ♦ Resolutions or proposals
are drafted prior -to the session by small
groups. The goal of the meeting is to
reach agreement about these proposals
where possible , rather than to debate
hot issues.

In the "Consensus-Trust" model, partici-
pants attempt to reach consensus up to a
point, then opt for a two-thirds majority
1 vote in a way that still takes into ac-
count the concerns of those who do not
support the resolution. (See the ac-
companying diagram. )

The model uses many techniques already
discussed in this chapter, A minute of
silence after hearing the resolution
gives everyone an opportunity to think
about it before speaking* Discussion
consists of requesting information for
' clarification and voicing concerns,
rather than a pro-con debate. Ideas
emerge in a positive, constructive at-
mosphere. The group works together to
make changes consistent with the intent
of the original resolution, but amending,
clarifying, or otherwise modifying it to
meet concerns expressed,

A vote is taken even when the test for
consensus is positive, both for the

104

ritual value of affirming the agreement
and because some people really want the
*-* chance to say "yes" to a proposal, rather
than just not saying IT no,"

On a lopsided vote, with two-thirds or
more in favor, a caucus meets trying to
modify the resolution so it will be more
acceptable to the whole group. The re-
vised resolution then either passes with
consensus or passes with a two-thirds or
more majority. In the latter case, the
unmet concerns and the percent of sup-
port are recorded as part of the passed
resolution. Thus, the value of all par-
ticipants 1 opinions is -demonstrated.

In the cases of close votes, with less
than two -thirds in favor, a hand vote is
immediately taken to decide if the group
wants to spend more time on it now. At
this writing, this part of the process
is yet untested, so modifications may
emerge as it is practiced and devel-
oped. The emphasis here, though, is to
use group tljne to productive ends, not
for endless debate on divisive issues.
This kind of approach is appropriate for
convention meetings where time is short*

The "Consensus-Trust" model uses a team
of facilitators, each with specialised
jobs. Two facilitators take turns in the
active and consulting roles, running the
meeting and making procedural decisions,
calling for votes, and so forth, A
watcher keeps track of items that need to
be picked up again later and also con-
sults on procedural decisions* Two note-
takers share the job of recording reso-
lutions; a timekeeper clocks and en-
forces time limits on individual speak-
ers and on parts of the process; and
two people on the convention floor pass
out papers, count votes, and answer par-
ticipants 1 questions or concerns.

Experiences in using this model have been
rewarding, even for people who consider
themselves jaded as far as meetings go*
Participants have reported that the
process engenders a humane, cooperative,
and creative atmosphere, and that it is
workable and flexible. The model repre-
sents one attempt to adapt the values

x i y

I rwT^oP ^La^lc? F^fuecrp }

Xj'pOPpSeP- Q^S^> CLAP! plGAfKPN, lMCOPPOpA-^>0CM(mi5 A? fb5=f!3t£"

.£

, I

of- f6$u& hpNDycrfZ

(vera

[1SSF] ( MA)0PI1f )

^■^w » ^ ^i^ ■£■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■**<" j

(

5 MINUTE"

\JCffB

v r- / v -t / v r y \<i#ti%

( PA55 1P Kt^lOMAL j ( PA55 j P f^t tCNAI- )

F^jce

AiP -STO-
OP COt^OC^U-5 f i

of-

AUD J

taaSgdSOS-TffOftf CoKNgUflOM NAODgU

105

* ***** * *

Cjv^p--

' TW %k ($&&&* AjU gf &K^ J^Ci£=> 0/
^O^ G r: fV^ +rt X^^TJ^ % ^ ^ X

^^i 6j^J^ i^^L p^3^

and techniques of consensus decision
making to the specialised setting of a
large group with short time and a product
to complete,

A final point: as groups try to adapt
the benefits of consensus decision mak-
ing to situations like conferences and
conventions, it is easy to assume that
they must work within the traditional
frameworks of such situations. Thus

i/ people work at changing the decision-
making procedures rather than trying to

F change the situation itself. It might
be valuable to experiment with allocating
more time for decision making at con-
ferences, or looking for other struc-
tural changes that would allow use of
something closer to a "straight consent
sus" process*

making work. Do not try to leap to a
new contract about how decisions will be
made halfway through a meeting or diffi-
cult discussion. Deciding on a process
is an important, and sometimes difficult,
decision in its own right. It needs to
be done separately from group work,
Members also need to know the "rules" and
to be able to trust that the process will
be stable, that it won^ change when the
going gets hard, and that other members
won't try to alter the rules to get their
way. If you do need to change your pro-
cess, set up a time to discuss the
changes that is clearly separate from
other concerns and decisions you must
deal with,

*
MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

CONCLUSION

The alternatives in this chapter may help
you adapt the principles of consensus to
a situation where "pure" consensus would
not be acceptable or effective. If the
specific techniques here do not meet your
needs, they may suggest new procedures
that your group can develop for its own
purposes. We want to caution you, how-
ever, that the time to agree on a pro-
cedure is before you begin your decision-

106

RESOURCE MANUAL FOR A LIVING REVOLUTION
(especially section entitled, "Decision-
Making Tools s " pp* 80-83) by Virginia
Coover, et al.

GROUP TECHNIQUES FOR PROGRAM PLANNING by
Andre Delbecq, et al.

er 13

Common Problems : What To Do About Them

Rarely is a meeting perfect. Rarely is
the process completely smooth > partici-
pation absolutely equal, all conflicts
worked through creatively and lovingly,
and all decisions inspirationally inno-
vative and entirely satisfactory to every-
one. The perfect meeting is, to meeting-
goers, as legendary as the perfect wave
is to surfers, or the perfect souffle to
epicures.

In truth, the best of meetings is usu-
'ally riddled with small problems; a pri-
ority set six months ago with full agree-
ment of the group comes up again as the
subject of heated controversy; a group
member is in a bad mood and has something
negative to say about every proposal* In
a good meeting, the members are alert to
these small problems and deal with them
as they come up, working at the process
« of the meeting rather than expecting it
to run itself,

^ But occasionally some problem will crop
up again and again and will cause much
frustration. In order to help your own
thinking, we will summarise what we have
said in other chapters by addressing com-
mon problems that we have encountered in

"" our own group experience. For each of
these problems, we will outline the
symptoms, possible causes of those symp-
toms, and what you might do about them,

Our approach will consist mainly of refer-
encing previous chapters and telling you
where to seek further information, rather
than reviewing subjects discussed elsewhere.
Of course this list cannot be complete.
Bach group is unique in its own way, and
these suggestions should be adapted to
the needs of your particular group.

I. POLARIZED FACTIONS
The Symptoms

The members of your group seem to break
up into two or more small factions that
repeatedly disagree with one another on
a variety of issues. This disagreement
has occurred consistently enough that the
members of the factions expect to disa-
gree with each other and are more con-
scious of their areas of disagreement
than of any agreement they share. They
resent each other and this increases
polarization.

The Analysis and What To Do

One or both of the underlying problems
described below could be causing these
factions.

107

A, There is a Real, Philosophical
Split in the Group

Analysis : For a group to work well,
members should be aware of commonly held
agreement on purpose, goals, or expecta-
tions. During times of stress ^ it helps
to remind a group of what they share in
common j despite their differences. Yet
even when a group does share a common
goal, individuals may have different be-
liefs about the best way of achieving
that goal* Or they may have different
beliefs about the priorities of their
goals,

What To Do : When differences in un-
derlying philosophy or perspective cause
repeated disagreements over similar top-
ics , it is time to discuss these topics
in depth. You might hold a priorities-
setting meeting, a goals-identification
meeting, or a retreat where members dis-
cuss why the group is important to them,
what they value about their experience
together, what their frustrations are,
what changes they would like to see.
Try to balance the discussion of the-
oretical issues with practical concerns.
Having a facilitator or consultant from
outside the group may help since he or
she will not be personally involved in
the group's conflicts* See Chapter 10*
CONFLICT AND PROBLEM SOLVING.

B+ There is A Long-Term Unresolved
Conflict

Analysis : This conflict doesn't have
to be about philosophical issues, as de-
scribed above, but it may have the same
effect of splitting the group.

Example: Several members, at a pre-
vious meeting, objected to the group's
policy of allowing John to make inde-
pendent financial decisions, and a
subcommittee was formed to make such
decisions in the future. Now John
feels angry about the lack of trust
shown towards him and about his own
loss of freedom* Several others also
feel that he was treated unfairly and
support him when he dissents about

^tnvww

MITOSIS; CREATIVE GROUP DIVISION

p Chie of my absolute beliefs is that any
movement which has been based on freedom
. * + is Hlce a live cell; there is a bi-
ology of ideas as there is a biology of
cells, and each goes through a process of
evolution. The parent cell splits and
the new entities in their turn divide
and divide again + Instead of indicating
a breakdown J it is a sign of health;
endless energy is spent trying to keep
together forces which should be distinct.
Each cell is fulfilling its Eiseion in
this separation, which in point of fact
is no separation at all* Cohesion is
maintained until in the end the whole is
a vast mosaic cleaving together in union
and strength*

— from Margaret Sanger
AN AUTOBICGRAPHI

V* W, Norton end Company
New York, 1938 pp- 396-7

iHH

other matters, The individuals who
had requested the change in policy
sense John f s resentment and are on
the defensive when he disagrees with
them. As a result, factions develop
B around issues that are completely un-
related to the original conflict.

What To Do : It is important to bring
such underlying conflicts into the open
and deal with them. Sometimes members
will act under the influence of such con-
flicts without realising it. If you
suspect an underlying conflict is dis-
rupting your group ^ bring it up for group
discussion. Pick a time to ask: "What's
really going on here?" Initially, mem-
bers may be unwilling to admit that they
still hold resentments about something
that is supposed to be "dead and buried"
(or that was never openly acknowledged in
the first place). If the group tries to
work things out in a supportive atmos-
phere, rather than laying blame or making
accusations j individuals can often recog-
nise and address the problem, or at least
discharge some of the tension- If the

108

- r

factionalism has been intense, your group
may need some trust building exercises
before tilings can be dealt with openly.
See: Chapter 10, CONFLICT AND PROBLEM
SOLVING , and "Increase Involvement and
Trust" in Chapter 11, TECHNIQUES FOR
GROUP BUILDING. You may also want to ■
review Chapter 9, WORKING WITH EMOTIONS.

II. ENDLESS DISCUSSION

The Symptoms

Simple decisions sometimes turn into
long, heated debates. For more complex
decisions, discussion can go on and on
and never seem to get anywhere.

The Analysis and What To Do

i i i^ -■ ■* — i 1 —

The root of this symptom may be one of
the problems described above uader
"Polarized Factions. " Read that section
as well as examining "the thoughts below,

A. Members Are Competitive, Too
Strongly Identified With Their
*> Own Ideas, or Afraid to Trust

One Another

^ — ■ —

Analysis : Consensus requires an at-
mosphere of cooperation and support .
Members must feel they can trust each
other, they must care about each other's
needs, and they must avoid competitive
attempts to "win" a decision-making "con-
test." See Chapter 3, ATTITUDES AND
CONSENSUS, and Chapter 4, JOUR PARTICI-
PATION IN THE CONCENSUS PROCESS.

Believing in such values, however, is
much easier than acting on them. Even
in groups which encourage members to act
in open, trusting ways, and to express
their feelings, "false trust" is often a
problem. Individuals may act trusting
because they feel pressured to do so in
order to be accepted, but deep down the
feeling of trust isn*t there yet. Try to
recognize in yourself the difference be-
tween mating an effort to be a little
more open and trusting and the mere
mimicry of such attitudes.

What To Do : Recognise that it is a
struggle always to feel cooperative, al-
ways to avoid attachment to your own
ideas, and always to trust others to
listen and care. Members can help one
another when changes in attitude and
behavior are sought*

Example: Laura has something argu-
mentative to say every time someone
expresses an opinion that is sub-
stantially different from hers. It
is right for people to criticise this
behavior and to gently pressure her
to act differently. But at the same
time, the group can help by recognis-
ing why she is acting this way* Is
it because the decision is personally
important to her and she is afraid
people will forget to consider the
points she has raised? If so, others
can assure her that they have heard
her and will remember to consider her
points (then they really will make a
special effort to do so). When Jack
states a counter argument, he can say:
"I think the point Laura just raised
is important to to be kept in mind.
I think we should also consider the
other side of the coin, which is . . , "

Group evaluations are good tools for
helping members in the never-ending
struggle to be good contributors. During
evaluations members can make a special
effort to recognize participation prob-
lems, to offer and to ask for help. See
"Evaluations" in Chapter 6> STRUCTURING
YOUR MEETINGS* and "Feedback and Criti-
cism/' in Chapter 8, COMMUNICATION SKILLS.

The group can also work on building a
more cohesive and supportive group cli-
mate where people will feel safer about
trusting each other. See Chapter 11,
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING. Also
look at Chapter 9, WORKING WITH EMOTIONS*
for ideas about what to do "along the
way. " — We are always along the way.

109

B, The Subject Itself Is Too U nwield y

Analysis : Does everyone know exactly
what decisions you are trying to make?
Was the goal of the discussion clear at
the beginning, but new issues have arisen
and clouded your purpose? Is the subject
too vague or complicated?

What To Do : You need a more struc-
tured agenda for organising your approach
to the problem. Perhaps the issue should
be broken into smaller parts which can be
discussed separately. Perhaps it can be
"pre-digested" so part of the thinking is
done before the meeting. See "Working
Outside of the Meeting" in Chapter 6^
STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS. Also review
the techniques of clarifying and reformu-
lating described in "Facilitative Func-
tions " in Chapter 7 3 THE ROLE OF THE
GROUP FACILITATOR.

C. ' Group Members Hav e "Hidden

Agendas 11

■

Analysis : The issue that is being
discussed is not the real, or the only,
issue. under consideration.

Example: The group is supposedly
deciding which project to undertake
next, but an unstated issue, perhaps
important to many people, perhaps
just to one or two, is whose project
will be worked on. In other words,
a power struggle is happening*

Example: David is arguing against
a particular expenditure because he
wants the money to remain available
for a different purchase, one he
hasn f t proposed yet.

Unrecognised hidden agendas can cause
discussion to flounder hopelessly. The
group can't come to agreement since the

issues being addressed aren T t the only
ones influencing people.

What To Do : What the group needs is
more clarity about the real issues at
hand* Usually if one person can identi-
fy the underlying issue, an "aha!" re-
sponse in the group will be followed by
relief that the real issue is out in the
open. Many times participants don't
realise they are being influenced by a
hidden agenda. It may take a group ef-
fort to stop and ask, "What is really go-
ing on here? Everybody look inward for
a moment, please,"

— -

110

Don't be accusatory in pointing out
another person's hidden agenda. Act in
a cooperative effort to achieve clarity.
If you suddenly realise that you have been
under the influence of a hidden agenda
yourself, point it out to the group.
Doing this will not only explain your
motivations -to them but might also stimu-
late a new perspective in others.. Hidden
agendas are more successfully exposed and
dealt with when the group's norms en-
courage discussion of process and feel-
ings. Review Chapter 4, YOUR PARTICI-
PATION IN THE CONSENSUS PROCESS, Chapter 9,
WORKING WITH EMOTIONS, and Chapter 11,
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING.

D, Discussion Meanders Because of
Poor Facilitation .

Analysis : Constant attention is re-
quired to keep a group focused on a single
topic of discussion and to maintain a
clear understanding of where the discus-
sion is moving. One 'person usually takes
responsibility for this task, but the
more members skilled in facilitation, the
better the process will be*

What To Do : Emphasize learning and
using facilitation skills by the whole
group. Discuss facilitation when you
evaluate your meetings* See "Evaluations"
in Chapter 6, STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS,
and see Chapter 7, THE ROLE OF THE GROUP
FACILITATOR.

III. LOW QUALITY DECISIONS
The Sy mptoms

Your group agrees to a decision, but
finds out later that many people are ac-
tually dissatisfied with the decision and
are not committed to carrying it out. Or
perhaps a decision originally seemed good,
but later it becomes apparent that it is
inadequate: it won't work; it doesn't
meet some important needs; or everyone

originally thought they knew what the
decision was, but now several people
have different memories of what the agree-
ment actually meant.,

The Analysis and Wh at To Do

Poor decisions may result from unwieldly
discussions or poor facilitation, ad-
dressed above under Sections II .B. and
II, D. If neither of these rings a bell,
the answer may be below,

A. The Decision Was Made On Insuffi -
cient Information ,

Analysis : Probably not enough ground-
work was done in advance of the actual
decision-making discussion, not enough
time was spent exchanging the informa-
tion that was available, or not enough
questions were asked at the time the
decision was being made.

What To Do : If your group realises
that it doesn't have enough information,
it is best to delay making a decision
while more facts and ideas are sought.
If you are under urgent time pressure,
you might set a special meeting, dele-
gate a subgroup representing different
viewpoints to get the information and
make a decision, or mandate someone to
find out the answers and go ahead on the
basis of those answers (e,g*, if it costs
more than $*+5 to repair the ditto machine
then get rid of it. If it costs less,
borrow a truck and take it to the repair
shop,} See "Working Outside of Meetings"
in Chapter 6, STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS.

B, Your Decisions Are Incomplete

Analysis : You aren't rounding deci-
sions out with details about implementa-
tion and accountability, or you aren't
recording your decisions for later refer-
ence. It seems like a decision gets made,
but then nothing happens.

What To Do : Be specific. You need to
decide how a decision will be carried out,
when , by whom , and with what kind of
follow-up. See the box on rf The Recorder r s
Responsibilities * " and the section titled
"Recording and Implementing Decisions" in

Chapter 6, STRUCTURING YOUR MEETING.

C* Decisions Are Passed, Despite

Underlying Pis agreements, Because
Members Fear Conflict

Analysis : Members should not feel they
have to avoid conflict. Conflict is an
important part of the consensus process
and a skilled group should be able to
survive and grow from the experience •

What To Do: See Chapter 10* CONFLICT
AND PROBLEM SOLVING* for guidelines about
dealing with conflict* and Chapter 8*
COMMUNICATION SKILLS* for useful skills
to use during conflict. See Chapter 11*
TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING* especially
the section titled "Increase Involvement
and Trust " for ways of improving intra-
group relations and providing the soli-
darity needed for members to Tmow their
group can survive conflict. If you want
still more* some useful techniques for
coping with potentially frightening
situations can be found in Chapter 9*
WORKING WITH EMOTIONS.

D« Time Pressure Is Causing You To
Rush Th rough Decision Making Too

Quickly ,

•

Analysis : Occasionally time pressure
causes real, inescapable problems. Usu-
ally, though , time pressure can be avoided.

What To Do , There are two kinds of
time pressure. General pressure occurs
when your group just has too much to do
in too little meeting time. All deci-
sions get rushed. In this case, con-
sider whether some decisions could be
delegated, instead of taking up the time
of the whole group. With issues that do
demand the whole group's attention, try
to organise discussion so its focus is
clear and members can address issues
directly and efficiently. See: "Using
Agendas" and "Working Outside of Meetings"
in Chapter 6* STRUCTURING YOUR MEETING;
Chapter ?* TEE ROLE OF THE GROUP FACILI-

THINGS VE HEED TO BE DOING
THAT WE FREQUENTLY DON'T DO

1. Assure that all people can feel co
fortable as part of the group, by going
slowly to leave room for quieter people, .
and by showing support for people,

■
2* Taking time to make sure we under-
stand what is going on.

3* Listening to others carefully; Baying
when we do not understand what they have
said.

*t. Building on what others eay; synthe-
sizing, rather than putting ideas in con-
flict.

5* Thinking creatively —breaking out of
ruts> looking for new alternatives.

6. Spending time preparing for meetings —
arranging thoughts coherently in advance,

?. Building understanding of, and skills
in using! the consensus process*

froa INVERT

TATOR; and "Formalized Process" in
Chapter 12* ADAPTATIONS OF THE PROCESS
FOR SPECIAL SITUATIONS.

When a particular decision must be made
quickly, a group faces a second kind of
time pressure. (For example * you must
decide whether to public ally endorse a
particular candidate at a rally tomorrow
night. ) Sometimes these pressures create
a real crisis and there's not much to do
except the best you can under the circum-
stances. On the other hand, groups often
perceive themselves to be at the mercy of
* time pressures that actually can be
changed.

Ask yourselves whether such a change is
possible in this case. If it really is
not, and if the group is having a hard
time agreeing, it is probably best not to
force a decision. Consider what the

112

costs of not deciding will be* (Will
the candidate lose the election without
your support? Will your support be just
as useful if it comes two weeks later?)
Weigh these factors before you rush
through a decision.

If you find yourselves repeatedly encoun-
tering similar urgent deadlines , you may
want to form a policy or develop a con-
tingency plan for making certain kinds of
decisions. Your group may want to review
Chapter 5„ WHEN AGREEMENT CANNOT BE
REACHED j as well as the references men-
tioned already for this situation,

E, Decisions Are Poor Because of

Incomplete Participation By Group
Members

Analysis : Your decision does not
represent the active sharing of ideas by
all group members,

What To Do: This problem is addressed
in the section below on nonparticipation.

IV* NONPARTICIPATION BY SOME MEMBERS
The Symptoms

Some members sit quietly through meetings
and don't participate much* More active
members may fail to notice this lack of
involvement, or they may be disturbed by
it* They feel out of touch with the quiet
members, don't know what they are think-
ing, or whether they support the group 1 s
activity or not*

Group members are^burnlng out *

Analysis and What To Do

While perfect equality of participation
is an ideal that goes hand- in-hand with
equality of power in a group* a complete
balance of participation is never
achieved. Straining too hard for it
may disrupt the natural balance of inter-
change in your group. When individuals
do not express themselves in group dis-
cussions* however, whether through lack
of desire, inability* or by being over-
powered by other group members* the whole
group suffers.

A* Low Participation Is a Personal

Characteristic of These Members

Analysis : Silent members are shy, lack
necessary communication skills, or simply
have a reticent style of participation.

What To Do : These members may need
special support from the group, or ac-
ceptance as they are. The rest of the
group needs to understand their reasons
for being silent. These issues are ad-
dressed in Chapter l$ s TECHNIQUES FOR
GROUP BUILDING,, under the section "Share
Responsibility, "

B* Group Members Are "Burning Out"

Analysis : The group has spent its quo-
ta of emotional and physical energy and
can't continue with efficiency or enthusi-
asm*

s: The group has spent its quota of emotional and physical energy and can t

farther efficiently or enthusiastically.

The burn-out may arise out of this particular meeting

It has lasted

* ^ SA A A/*VW W *A AA * '

113

What To Do : The "burn-out ir may arise
out of this particular meeting: it has
lasted too long, has been too boring, or
too emotionally intense, or it comes at
the end of an arduous week. Take a
break, change the subject, do a "light
and lively" exercise, or reschedule the
meeting for another time and go out for
pissa. See Chapter 9* WORKING WITH
EMOTIONS^ and Chapter 11* TECHNIQUES FOR
GROUP BUILDING.

On the other hand, the bum-out may be
a long-term problem. At such times it's
crucial to re-examine the group , the way
^ it works, and what it is doing to find
out what the problem is. Are your ac-
tivities unrewarding? Are your meetings
too drawn out and tiring? If the group
is taking energy away from its members,
and if members aren't being recharged
4 somehow (by cameraderie with other mem-
bers, by a dedication to a purpose, by
feelings of success,, or by a balance
of rewarding, challenging tasks against
the tedious ones), then something needs
to be changed or disaster will occur,
It T s time to do some concentrated evalu-
ating and possibly to change goals or
procedures. See Chapter 6* STRUCTURING
70UR MEETINGS^ for suggestions about doing
evaluations and for ideas about stream-
lining your meeting process* Also see
the references mentioned in the paragraph
above*

C, Silent Members Lack Trust In The
Group or Fear Conflict

Analysis : Individuals do not- speak
their minds because they fear speaking
will bring undesirable consequences. They
think other members may launch a critical
attack on the statement, someone's feel-
ings will be hurt by disagreement, or an
ugly conflict will ensue.

What To Do : If your group fosters
norms of trust and caring, and if conflict
is accepted as natural, then this fear of
^ putting oneself on the line (which every-
one experiences to some degree) shouldn't
keep members from saying what they feel
is important. Again* see Chapter 11*

114

TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILDING* on foster-
ing supportive norms in a group. Look at
Chapters* COMMUNICATION SKILLS* Chap-
ter 10* CONFLICT AND PROBLEM SOLVING*
and Chapter 9* WORKING WITH EMOTIONS* for
specific skills that make these norms
work •

D + A Member is Reticent Because of
Lack of Commitm ent

Analysis : The individual just isn't
interested, or doesn't care anymore what
the group does or decides*

What To Do : The group needs an ex-
planation of this feeling. Is it because
the member is no longer very interested
in the group? Does he or she have needs
that aren't being met? Are there parti-
cular frustrations with the role the mem-
ber plays? Does he or she feel left out,
ignored, unchallenged? Or is it a natu-
ral growing away from the group as inter-
ests change? If these conditions are long
term, they may signal a need for change.
The person may need to assume a differ-
ent role in the group, address problems
in relationships with group members, or
possibly. leave the group. This may be a
private decision, but the group should be
informed so it knows what to expect and
understands why the member is choosing to
alter his or her relationship with the
group. In other cases, the needed change
may affect other people, or the member may
need to share and receive input from the
group, A special tijme can be set aside
for discussing these concerns.

If the lack of commitment or interest ap-
plies just to the particular project or
item being dealt with at the moment, the
group may tolerate a member's not par-
ticipating in the discussion at hand. Or
they may believe that the issue is of
■basic importance to the group and they
will ask the particular member, as part
of his or her commitment to the group as
a whole, to take part in this matter de-
spite personal lack of interest.

Finally, a member may fade away from the
group due to individual burn-out. He or

she is overextended in activities and
commitments, or a personal crisis (e.g. ,
illness, a problem at home) is using up
energy. Burn-out is a special problem
in consensus groups since they require
such a high level of involvement from
all members. Many times members make
demands on each other's energy just when
they should instead remind one another
to take care of themselves and to treat
their energy as a limited and valued re-
source* Group members need a balance be-
tween working together for the good of
the whole group and nurturing the in-
dividuals in the group. If they let
each other pay too high a price for the
group's sake, more will be lost than
gained. If a person is truly burned out,
she or be needs group support. It is OK
to take a leave of absence, to cut back
time involvement by doing less, or to cut

back emotional involvement (perhaps by
doing only clerical work for a while in-
stead of stressful planning or negotiat-
ing activities), If a member doesn't get
this kind of support from the group when
he or she is burning out, the final re-
sult may be the person's giving up and
withdrawing completely, or leaving in
anger and bitterness* See Chapter 9,
WORKING WITH EMOTIONS, and Chapter 11,
TECHNIQUES FOE GROUP BUILDING,

M**W

V. SOME INDIVIDUALS DOMINATE DISCUSSION

The Sjrrnptoms

One or a few members speak the most at
meetings. Perhaps this over-participa-
tion is recognized by the group as a
problem and is a source of frustration.
Or perhaps it is generally accepted be-
cause these people also have dispropor-
tionate power in the group. Either way,
it will interfere with the consensus pro-
cess.

Analysis and What To Do

Over-participation may reflect a power
imbalance, or it may be the result of
other factors in an individual's partic-
ipation style*

A, There Is a Power Imbalance

Analysis : The members who speak most
have the most control over what the group
does. Other members, whether they like
the situation or not, find themselves de-
ferring to these people.

What To Do : Sometimes members get
satisfaction out of having excessive pow-
er in a group. Often, though, they would
like to get out of that role and have
other members share the burden of respon-
sibility. (In workshops we have done,
there are usually as many people asking
"How do I give up the power I have? 11 as
there are ones who want to know, "How
do I get more power? 1 '} Whichever the
situation in your group, the best ap-
proach is to openly acknowledge the prob-
lem and work together to change it. This
change will be most effective if it is
attempted cooperatively rather than as a
coup against the "establishment." Remem-
ber the scope for defensiveness that ex-
ists when someone's power is challenged.
Even when a person would like to hand over
some responsibility j it is often diffi-
cult to see a less experienced person do
something differently than you would your-
self, and perhaps make mistakes. It is
also scarey to take on new responsibil-
ities. Often power imbalances continue

115

to exist, with resentments on both sides,
because members are afraid, or don't know
how, to Instigate change. If treated as
a mutual struggle, without laying blame
on individuals for their mistakes or their
roles, the move towards more equal par-
ticipation can be a rewarding learning
experience for everyone. See "Share
Responsibility" in Chapter 11, TECHNIQUES
FOR GROUP BUILDING, for specific hints
about equalizing involvement. See
"Feedback and Criticism" in Chapter 8,
COMMUNICATION SKILLS, for tools that
can be used in talking about the situa-
tion. Finally, see Chapter 9, WORKING
WITH EMOTIONS, and Chapter 10, CONFLICT
AW PROBLEM SOLVING, for guidelines about
working with the feelings and conflicts
involved.

B . Individuals Just Talk Too M uch
At Meetings

Analysis: This volubility reflects
some characteristic, in the member T s style
other than power in the group.

What To Do : Try to find out why the
person talks so much. Maybe he or she
likes being in the limelight. More likely
he or she lacks confidence. Sometimes
people drone on about a subject because
they are afraid that others won't hear
and understand what they have to say, or
that if they don't have a comeback for
every objection, others will forget the
important points they have raised. Using
the communications skills (described under
"Feedback and Criticism" in Chapter 8,
COMMUNICATION SKILLS) explain to the
person how he or she is causing a prob-
lem in the group and what specific changes
you would like to see. If the group
climate is supportive, and if the person
can recognize the validity of the need
for a change in speaking style, then the
whole group can support this change.
During meetings, members can: a} assure
the over-participating person that he or
she is being heard; and b) point out when
the person slips back into the problem
behavior ("Paula, can you get to the
point more quickly please?" — "Are you
going to say something different that

you haven't already said before?"). This
is a good time for humor (or at least
good humor) that lets the individual
; know he or she is accepted by the group,
"despite the fact that the group isn't
tolerating a specific behavior* The more
that blame and accusation can be avoided,
the better. But do be direct.

Good facilitation skills can help a mem-
ber be aware of the need for equalising
participation, for staying on the topic
and being relevant in all remarks, and
for being aware of the progress of a
discussion and the whole group's needs.
You might have the monopoliser share
facilitation with another, skilled facili-
■ tator. This can increase the person's
sensitivity to his or her own speaking
style. (See Chapter 7, THE ROLE OF THE
GROUP FACILITATOR: also see Section II. A.
above under "Endless Discussion* ")

VI. A GROUP MEMBER
APPARENTLY WON'T COOPERATE

The Symptom

A group member seems to be totally unco-
operative despite considerable effort on
improving skills and sharing responsi-
bility. Such a member may be disrupting
the whole group's ability to work effec-
tively,

Anal ysis and What To Do

When such situations occur they are pain-
ful, bewildering and frustrating for all
concerned. We don't have any smooth
solutions to fall back on, (For an Hdeal"
resolution to such a problem, see the
boxed example, tf A Case Study of Problem
Solving, " in Chapter 10, CONFLICT AND
PROBLEM SOLVING. ) However, you should be
sure that the group is justified in con-
sidering that a true case of non-coopera-
tion exists, and that the group is not
merely scapegoat ing someone who has a
legitimate but different perspective on
important issues.

116

The "Hon- Cooperation" of a Member

May Be Resolved Into a Set of
Strong Disagreements Which Can
Be Solved or at Least Mutually
Acknowledged

Analysis : Sometimes a member who is
causing considerable disruption in a
group is labeled as "uncooperative 1 * be-
cause the status quo is being shaken or
because cherished assumptions are being
questioned. Often the person may have
good intentions but poor communication
skills,

What To Do:

— a) Deal with problems caused by a
member's behavior as early as possible*

j* When people are committed to "cooperat-
ing" and to "accepting differences ," it
is often very hard to express anger to-
ward another person whose views or behav-

~* iors are different. . Oft en each member
will sit back waiting for someone else
to be the first to complain. This only
allows time for anger to grow and for
everyone to build a more solid "case"
against the problem member. When stored
anger finally erupt s, the member can be

k> scapegoated by the rest of the group . and
the situation is almost always made worse.
The problem member feels alone and alien-
ated, whether he or she recognises the
source of this feeling or not; and other
members begin reinforcing each other's
anger and blame- It is hard to think
rationally when this happens. So speak
up soon, even about little things, while
*' you're still willing and able to do it
in a supportive, give-and-take manner.
(See "Guidelines for Responding to Con-
flict" in Chapter 10, CONFLICT AND
PROBLEM SOLVING. See "Feedback and
Criticism" in Chapter 8, COMMUNICATION
SKILLS. )

— b) Assume for as long as you can
_ that the person wants to cooperate and
offer whatever help you can to make this
possible.

A new, probationary, member of a primari-
ly Tolunteex group had asked for employ-
ment in the group's office during the
suEmer* It was decided that he should
have an evaluation session, to see if the
group wanted to accept bita as a full mem-
ber, before his employment was considered.
During the evaluation session many mem-
bers expressed great anger and frustra-
tion at his behavior in the group. Serious
problems were pointed out about his par-
ticipation in meetings. However, after
the anger was vented, the group decided to
delay the decision about whether he could
be a full Ete&berof the group, but to go
ahead and give him the summer job. During
the period of his employment, he had a
better chance to learn about the group and
its members, and people were able to get
to know him better. He began to fit in.
In the fall, the group was happy to accept
Miu as a regular isember.

— c) Listen to the problem member.
What are his or her perceptions of the
situation? Try to identify with that
perspective. (See "Listening" in
Chapter 5, COMMUNICATION SKILLS. }

— d) Question your own analysis, Is
it a case of absolute non-cooperation,
or is it just easier for you to dismiss
a person who works and thinks differently
from the rest of the group?

— e) Consider third pary mediation.
In cases of protracted and strong disa-
greement, a person outside the group may
see the issue more clearly than anyone
in the group can hope to. (See "Problem
Solving" in Chapter 10, CONFLICT AND
PROBLEM SOLVING, )

— f) As a last resort, you might want
to try changing the person^ role in the
group or asking the person to take a
leave of absence while everyone cools off

117

B. The Member Is Truly Non- Cooperative

^ —

Analysis : If every effort toward pin-
pointing and resolving- differences between
a member and the group have failed, then
you may be justified in thinking of a
member as non-cooperative. It is crucial
to realise that such a label has little
to say about the true causes of the situ-
ation* People are, after all, not un-
cooperative out of sheer diabolical intent.
They have reasons which, however con-
voluted to others, make sense to them.
A person may be acting out of personal
needs (e.g. for more attention or greater
influence) , or perhaps he or she wishes
to make the group over in an image which
no one in the group can comprehend, let
alone agree to or act on. Or perhaps
mutual antagonism has reached a destruc-
tive phase that cannot be controlled.

What To Do : There is little point in
trying to completely uncover the reasons
for uncooperativeness. But it is still
important to recognise that such an ex-
planation does exist, even when the only
solution is to ask the problem member to
leave the group. This awareness makes it
possible to offer the person sympathetic
respect for his or her feelings during
the process of separation and it lessens
the sense of failure and the desire for
recriminations on both sides. Use the
occasion to do some serious evaluating
of your groups process (perhaps with in-
put from the problem member), to think
about things you can change for the
better, and to do some group building
activities to help you feel good about
yourselves again. (See "Evaluations"
in Chapter 8, STRUCTURING YOUR MEETINGS,
Chapter 9> WORKING WITH EMOTIONS,, and
Chapter ll 4 TECHNIQUES FOR GROUP BUILD-
ING.)

AOTEORS 1 NOTE

This section on non-cooperating members
was added as an afterthought near the end
of our writing process. We realised we
had avoided addressing this thorny prob-
lem by a neat trick of reasoning: con-
sensus presupposes cooperation, so If
someone Is not cooperating, it is not
consensus; ergo, we don f t have to talk
about it*

If only.

Finally we forced ourselves to face facts
and admitted that this is one of the
situations that consensus groups some-
times face, Fortunately it happens only
rarely. But once in a lifetime ie enough*

So we put ourselves on the line and said
the best ve could on the subject* We
don't mean to imply by our step-by-etep
"recipe" that you can face such a prob-
lem easily, methodically and painlessly.
It is alJBaoet always messy and confusing
and unpleasant.

Go forth bravely, friflnde. Mistakes vill
be ttade, but you can only do your beet
and leam from the process. If there is
a silver lining here, it's the fact that
surviving such times almost always re*
suits In groups and individuals learning
better skills and gaining understanding
that can help in the future.

— Chel

118

Bibliography

Below are some publications that we have
found useful for understanding consensus
groups and how they work. We have tried
to be selective, rather than comprehen-
sive, in the materials we included here,
and to let you know why we chose each
title. Some come with wholehearted rec-
ommendations, some with qualified recom-
mendations: our annotations will make
the differentiation for you*

Some of these materials are produced by
small or private presses and must be
mail ordered* We have given you all the
information we have about how to acquire
such publications, including the last
known price. Since printing and postage
rates vary rapidly, you may want to
double check with a source before making
an order.

Auvine, Brian, Betsy Densmore, Mary

Extrom, Scott Poole and Michel Shanklin,

A MANUAL FOR GROUP FACILITATORS, 1977*

The Center for Conflict Resolution
(731 State Street, Madison, HI 53703,
$^50 + $1.10 postage). The values,
assumptions and techniques of group
facilitation. Especially useful to
people planning workshops. Includes
sections on communication, conflict,
problem solving, what can go wrong
and what to do about it, and many
other relevant topics,

■

Bart 00, Glenn, DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS:
A STUDY OF THE QUAKER METHOD, 1978,
Progressive Publisher (§01 % 32nd,
No, 1002, Chicago, IL 606l6, $!)♦
Condensed from a 1952 thesis describe
ing consensus as practiced by the 57th
St. Friends Meeting of Chicago, De-
scribes how consensus operates and what
makes it work.

Becker, Norma, "Beyond the Abdication of
Power," in WIN* Dec. 7, 1978. (326
Livingston, Brooklyn, N,Y* 11217,
212/62^-8337, ) Presents an argument
against the views expressed by
Kokopeli and Lakey in LEADERSHIP FOR
CHANGE. We include it for the thought-
provoking issues it raises and because
it demonstrates situations and assump-
tions under which consensus is not ap-
propriate,

Bookchin, Murray. POST SCARCITY ANARCH-
ISM, 1971- Ramparts Press, San
Francisco . A collection of essays
presenting an alternate vision of
power through analysis of the ways
people work together and the goals
people choose.

Case, John and Rosemary Talor, eds,,
CO-OPS, COMMUNES AND COLLECTIVES;
EXPERIMENTS IN SOCIAL CHANGE IN THE
2960 T S AND 1970 % 1979. Pantheon
Books, N.Y. Contains case studies of
alternative organisations and articles
addressing Issues relevant to how such
organizations function. Particularly
good is Jane J, Mansbiridge's paper,

"The Agony of Inequality. " Also recom-
mended: "Conditions for Democracy:
Making Participatory Organizations
Work" by Joyce Rothschild-Whitt,

Coover, Virginia, Ellen Deacon, Charles
Esser and Christopher Moore, RESOURCE
MANUAL FOR A LIVING REVOLUTION, 1977.
Movement for a New Society (^722 Bal-
timore Ave., Philadelphia, PA 191^3,
$5)- An excellent presentation of
the personal, interpersonal and group
skills necessary for nonviolent social
change, as well as the theory and argu-
ments for social change activity.

119

The sections on working in groups and
developing communities of support
provide a wealth of valuable informa-
tion and ideas.

Craig, James H. and Marge, SYNERGIC

POWER: BEYOND DOMINATION AND PERMIS-
SIVENESS* 1973. Proactive Press (Box
296, Berkeley, CA 9**701). Suggests
tools for generating creative coopera-
tion in personal relations and on a
social- scale. Analyses human nature,
human potential and power dynamics,
then offers a model for developing a
cooperative, "synergic society. 1 '

Delbecq, Andre, Andrew H, Van de Van, and
David H. Gustafson, GROUP TECHNIQUES
FOR PROGRAM PLANNING: A GUIDE TO NOM-
INAL AND DELPHI PROCESSES* 1975 ■
Scott, Foresman and Co* Presents two
highly adaptable methods for high-
involvement decision making in large
groups. Some of the more "progressive"
work coming out, ^of business schools in
the 1970' s.

Filley, Alan, INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT
RESOLUTION* 1975* Scott, Foresman
and Co. (Glenview, IL, $5,95), Exam-
ines conflict dynamics, strategies of
resolution 3 and personal styles of
responding to conflict. The coopera-
tive model for "Integrative Decision
Making" is the basis for the Creative
Problem Solving technique presented
in Chapter 10 of this book* Recom-
mended for anyone who wants a more
in-depth understanding of this ap-
proach. Written from a business man-
agement perspective.

■

Fluegelman, Andrew, ed. , THE NEW GAMES
BOOK* 1976* Dolphin Books /Doubleday
and Co., Inc., Garden City, N»Y.
A collection of noncompetitive, "play
hard" games from the New Games Founda-
tion. Emphasis is on fun and coopera-
tion. Highly recommended,

French, J.R.P. and B. Raven, "The Bases
of Social Power* " in D. Cartwright,
ed. , STUDIES IN SOCIAL POWER* 1959.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
A classic, scholarly article analys-

120

ing the different ways in which people
come to exert power or influence over
others. Written with formal, hierar-
chical organisations in mind, but
highly adaptable for understanding
small group dynamics.

Freundlich, Paul, Chris Collins and
Mikki Wenig, A GUIDE TO COOPERATIVE
ALTERNATIVES* 1979* Community Publi-
cations Cooperative (P.0, Box k2&,
Louisa, VA 23093, $5,95)* Edited
by "Communities * Journal of Coopera-
tive Living* " this book is a resource
guide of ideas, resources, references
and contacts for people interested in
living and working cooperatively.
Includes well- annotated sections on
politics, decision making, education,
community organising and much more.

Friedman, Anita, "Mediations*" 1973-
Issues in Radical Therapy Collective
(Box 235^^, Oakland, CA 9^623, 50tfh
A step-by- step approach to solving
interpersonal conflicts using radical
therapy principles and a third-party
facilitator* (Also available as a
chapter In H. Wyckoff r s LOVE* THERAPY
AND POLITICS. )

Geeting, Baxter and Corlnne, HOW TO LISTEN
ASSERTIVELY* 1976. Monarch, N.Y. A
whole book about listening! (Actually,
the concepts here could be presented,
less cutely, in one, concise chapter.)
Emphasises the importance of attentive,
open-minded listening using plenty of
metaphors and examples to drive the
principles home, Worth reading.

Gordon, Thomas, PARENT EFFECTIVENESS

TRAINING* 1970. Peter H. Wyden, Inc.,
N.Y. Describes communication skills
that are useful in conflict situations
(e.g., ,r I messages" and "active listen-
ing 1 '). Written about conflicts with
children, but universally applicable-

Guthrie, Eileen and Sam Miller, MAKING
CHANGE* 1977. Consultants for Com-
munity Development (2535 Columbus Ave.,
South, Minneapolis, MN, $6). How to
effect community change as an indi-
vidual or as a member of a support

J ■

i
i

group * a neighborhood organisation,
a board of directors, or other poli-
tical group. Organizing skills, con-
flict diagnosis and resolution,
communication skills, and running
meetings are a few of the skills de-
scribed in the context of neighbor-
hood/community change,

Harrison, Marta, FOR THE FUN OF IT!

SELECTED COOPERATIVE GAMES FOR CHID-
DREN AND ADULTS, 1975- Nonviolence and
Children (Friends Peace Committee,
1515 Cherry St,, Philadelphia, PA
19102, $1.25 * ^0* postage). Activi-
ties that groups of adults, kids, or
a mixture can use to develop coopera-
tion and to have fun.

Hopkins, Robert, "Consensus Decision
Making: An Analysis of the Litera-
ture," 1977. Can order from The
Center for Conflict He solution
(731 State St., Madison, WI 53703,
$3 for copying and 1 postage). In-
cludes a look at historical interest
in consensus, an overview of research
with critiques, and recommendations
for future research. Brings together
most of the current empirical findings
in research about consensus.

Hopkins, Robert, "Multivariate Analysis
of Tb)o * Competing* Theories of Con-
sensus Decision Making, " 1978. Can
order from The Center for Conflict
Resolution (731 State St., Madison,
WI 53703, $3 for copying and postage).
Builds on current theories (by J.
Hall) to propose steps necessary to
ensure maximum quality and acceptance
of a consensus decision,

INVERT (Institute for Nonviolence Educa-
tion, Research and Training, EFD 1,
Newport, ME 0^953). This organisation
has developed several inexpensive
publications (including "Consensus
Education Packet** and "Sharing Con-
sensus: A Handbook for Consensus
Workshops") which describe how con-
sensus works, how to participate
effectively, and how to teach con-
sensus skills. They seem to be con-
tinually developing their materials

and replacing them with new and better
ones. We encourage you to write them,
especially if your group is just begin-
ning to use consensus, and inquire
about their latest publications,

Johnson, David and Frank, JOINING TO-
GETHER: GROUP THEORY AND GROUP SKILLS,
1975. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ* A practical learning
guide that includes both theory and
activities to improve understanding
and skills in subjects such as group
dynamics, leadership, conflict, com-
munication and group decision making.

Joreen, "The Tyranny of Structureless-
ness, " originally printed in "Second
Wave," Vol. II, No, 1* Available
from KNOW, Inc + (P.O. Box 86031*
Pittsburgh, PA 15221). A sharp analy-
sis and critique of problems in "lead-
erless" groups in the women's movement.
Advocates explicit, agreed-upon norms
to regulate power dynamics* A "clas-
sic" in the literature of democratic
group process*

Kokopeli, Bruce and George Lakey^ "Lead-
ership for Change, " 1978. Movement
for a New Society, (^722 Baltimore
Ave,, Philadelphia, PA 191^3, $1*25).
Traditional, "patriarchal" leadership
is compared to " feminist n or shared
leadership in groups* Tactics for
changing leadership style are described,

Lakey, Berit, "Meeting Facilitation: The
No-Magic Method," 1975. Movement for
a New Society (^722 Baltimore Ave, ,
Philadelphia, PA 191^3, 60*). Short,
straight- forward, how-to instructions
explain what facilitation is, how to
use an agenda, and tips for helping
the group along* (Also appears as a
chapter in BUILDING SOCIAL CHANGE
COMMUNITIES by The Training/Action
Affinity Group. )

Lyons, Grade, CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM:
A HANDBOOK,, 1976. Issues in Radical
Therapy (P.O. Box 5039> Berkeley, CA
9^705, $3). The need for, logic
behind, and techniques of construc-
tive criticism in groups. Includes

121

detailed description of specific
skills. Written for Marxist activ-
ists, but useful for anyone,

Machiavelli, Giavonni, THE PRINCE, 1952.
Mentor Classics, The New American :
Library, The classic analysis of
; power and politics (originally pub-
" lished during the Italian Renaissance).
It is rare to find such a clear and
explicit representation of the tradi-
tional approach to political and -
social control*

"Ms. Magazine*" Vol* VII, No. % $ October,
1978. "Coping with Conflict*" by
Judith Thurman, "How to Avoid Conflict
When You Can* " by Kathryn Lee Girard,
and "How to Confront When You Have To"
by Kathryn Lee Girard. (370 Lexing-
ton Ave., N.Y., NY 10017, $1,50 for
back issue.) Discusses women's so-
cialisation regarding conflict behav-
ior, fear of conflict, .and methods
for coping with- conflict ■

Pfeiffer, J. William and John Jones, eds.,

A BASDBOOK OF STRUCTURED EXPERIENCES

FOR HUMAN RELATIONS TRAINING* annual

series, 1972 to present, University

' Associates Publishers, Inc. (7596

- Eads Ave., La Jolla, CA 92037). A
wide variety of exercises for use in
groups and training situations. Ac-
tivities range in diversity from
problem-solving situations, to non-
verbal communication , to male/female
role plays. Most of the exercises
are fairly complex or tightly struc-
tured. Thorough instructions are
given .

Pfeiffer, J. William and John Jones, eds.,
ANNUAL HANDBOOK FOR GROUP FACILITATORS*
1972 to present* University Associates
Publishers, Inc. (7596 Eads Ave.,
La Jolla, CA 92037). A wealth of how-
to information coming out each year on
how to work with groups. Include
structured experiences, lecturettes,
resources, research, theory, practice,
and more*

"Psychology Today* " Vol. V, No. 6,

November, 1971. "Groupthink" by Irving
Janis, "Selective Inattention 1 ' by
Ralph White, and "Decisions* Decisions*
Decisions 1 ' by Jay Hall. Three articles
concerned with group conformity in mak-
ing decisions. The first two demon-
strate how the conformity resulting
from group dynamics at the top of hier-
archies has led to disastrous decisions,
including war* Hall T s article defends
group decision making's capacity for
creativity. The series offers a view
of what can happen when preconditions
necessary for consensus are not met.

"Quest: A Feminist Quarterly* " Vol. IV,
No. **, Pall, 1978. "The Process /Product
Split" by Ginny Crow, "Integrating
Process and Product" by Dorothy Rid-
dle, and "Process /Product Split: A
Misnomer" by Caroline Sparks. (P.O.
Box 88^3, Washington, B.C., 2O003-)
These three articles discuss the
"process/product debate" from three
different perspectives- Addresses
the problem: how do groups ex-
perience and value the tension between
productive work and attention to pro-
cess and human needs? The writers
emphasise women's groups , but the - is-
sues raised are Important to all.

122

Rice, Celeste, "Face Saving, Criticism
and Defensiveness, " 1981. Center for
Conflict Resolution (731 State St,,
Madison, WI 53703, $2)- A well-
researched article that integrates
scholarly and experiential sources.
Discusses the principles and skills
for giving criticism in a way that
can reduce defensiveness in both the

sender and receiver of feedback.

■

Rosenberg, Marshall B. FROM NOW ON:
WITHOUT BLAME AND PUNISHMENT, 1977.
( Author r s address: 3229 Bordeaux,
Sherman, TX 75090, 21*1/893-3886,
$3.50.) A personal approach to the
skills of giving feedback and criti-
cism in a way that promotes coopera-
tion rather than conflict. Makes a
persuasive statement about applying
these techniques in all relationships.

Simon, Sidney B. NEGATIVE CRITICISM , . -
AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, 1978.
Argus Communications, We disagree with
this book's cleverly-depicted premise
that criticism is almost always a bad
thing. But it does make a number of
good suggestions about how not to mis-
use criticism and offers good ideas
about interpersonal validation.

Strongforce, Inc. , DEMOCRACY IN THE

WORKPLACE: READINGS ON THE IMPLEMEN-
TATION OF SELF MANAGEMENT IN AMERICA,
1977. (2121 Decatur Place NW,
. Washington, D.C*, $5.) A how-to for
groups beginning a participatory busi-
ness. Covers structural, organisation-
al , legal and financial matters, A
brief section on decision making.

Training/ Act ion Affinity Group, BUILDING
SOCIAL CHANGE COMMUNITIES, 1979.
Movement for a New Society (^722 Bal-
timore Ave., Philadelphia, PA 191^3,
$2,80 + 70* postage.) Skills for
creating and maintaining a collective
or cooperative group, especially liv-
ing communities. Excellent, concise
chapters on consensus decision making,
facilitation and conflict resolution.

Vocations for Social Change, NO BOSSES

HERE: A MANUAL ON WORKING COLLECTIVELY,
1976, (353 Broadway, Cambridge, MA
02139, $3.) An overview of how to or-
ganize and operate a working collec-
tive. Includes discussions of decision
making, meetings, common interpersonal
problems as well as practical concerns
such as finances and bookkeeping.
Written in a personal, friendly style
and draws on the experience of many
collective members*

Walton, Richard, INTERPERSONAL PEACE- .
MAKING: CONFRONTATIONS AND THIRD
PARTY CONSULTATION, 1969 . Addison-
Wesley Publishing Company, Provides
a model for diagnosing recurring con-
flict between two parties and shows
how a third-party facilitator can
help interrupt and resolve the con-
flict. The theory is demonstrated
with three in-depth case studies drawn
from standard work situations,

Woodrow, Peter, CLEARNESS: PROCESSES
FOR SUPPORTING INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS
IN DECISION MAKING, 1976. Movement
for a New Society (^722 Baltimore Ave.,
Philadelphia, PA 191^3* $1-75). This
booklet describes a process groups can
use to think through an issue carefully
or to help a member do so. It is com-
monly used when deciding whether to
accept a new member into a group and
to help individuals make difficult
personal decisions. CLEARNESS gives
practical suggestions and sample
agendas for having a clearness meet-
ing.

Wyckoff, Hogie, ed,, LOVE, THERAPY AND
POLITICS, 1976, Grove Press, Inc.,
(196 W. Houston St*, New York, NY
1001*0. This is a collection of
articles compiled from the first year
of "Issues in Radical Therapy. - r It
includes political perspectives on
therapy, group dynamics, male/female
sex roles, and other concerns rele-
vant to the practice of radical
therapy.

123

7=%

Wyckoff, Bogie, SOLVING WOMEN f S PROB-
LEMS (THROUGH AWARENESS* ACTION * AND
CONTACT) * 1977* ' Grove Press, Inc.
(196 W. Houston St*, New York, NY
1001*0. The lovdown on radical thera-
py principles and practice, positive
personal change that empowers indi-
viduals to work effectively for social
change. Describes the philosophy,
theory , and practical application of
problem- solving- groups,

Yoast, Richard, WHAT YOU CAN DO: A CITI-
ZEN'S GUIDE TO COMMUNITY ORGANIZING FOR
THE PREVENTION OF ALCOHOL, OTHER DRUG,
MENTAL HEALTH AND SOUTH PROBLEMS, 1981.
TliB Wisconsin Clearinghouse (195^ E,
Washington, Madison, WI 53704). A work-
book for people organizing to work co-
operatively for social change in a
commiaity. Good information on leader-
ship, group process, and especially on
defining goals and planning as a group.

"I do not go to a cozsittee jneeting mere-
ly to give my own ideas. If that were
all, I might write ssy fellow ©embers a
letter. But neither do I go to learn
other people's ideas. If that were all,
I might ask each to write me a letter.
I go to a committee meeting in order that
all together we may create a group idea,
an idea which will be better than any of
our ideas alone, moreover which will be
better than ail of our ideas added to-
gether. For this group idea will not be
produced by any process of addition ? but
by the interpret rat ign of us all* 11

—Maiy Parker Follett, THE NEW STATE
as quoted by EJVERT

»^^^^^ ^ W^ ^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ N» ^^^ ^^ * **

(Possible box to fit on page 92—contrlbutlcn of new members.)

124

A living coop was trying to decide whether to ask a particular member, whose
emotional disturbances were making life difficult for all, to move out of the house
Although the group normally operated by majority rule, they decided to strive for
consensus since the issue was so sensitive. Host members felt that the situation
had deteriorated to such a point that it was necessary to ask the problem member
to leave. Everyone agreed except one person* the newest member of the group.

She insisted that the group should try to pull together and give the problem member
help and support. She came under considerable pressure from older group members
who Insisted that her newness meant that she didn't really know the full extent
of the problem. Despite the pressure, however^ the new member blocked consensus
and did not permit the group to expel 1 the problem member. Forced to make one
last effort to work things out* the older members of the coop readjusted their
viewpoints and found that they could sympathize with the problem member after all.

The situation Improved.

* A**W V^ A * Nf« ^^

2OOQ-3C3A0G2-82

■

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Building United Judgment: A Handbook for Consensus Decision Making"

See other formats