Consensus Validation
Consensus Validation
A Tool for Teams
by
Mr. Leslie R. Butler
William Wilkinsky, PhD
THE ATHYN GROUP
According to Peter Senge (The Fifth Discipline and Fifth Discipline Fieldbook), the word team can be traced to an Indo-European word meaning "to pull" and included the sense of "pulling together". The modern sense of team as "a group of people acting together" is traceable to the sixteenth century, though it is clear that groups of people "acting together" have existed almost from the beginning of human history. Whether our early ancestors were formally acting as functioning teams, or were simply driven by common necessity and needs to act in concert, leads to a discussion over the key elements of a team and the definition of team. Our purpose in this paper is to share a tool for teams whatever definition you may find comfortable and accurate.
In an article on "TeamBuilding" Dr. Wilkinsky writes: "Effective teams produce outstanding results and succeed in achieving despite difficulties. Members feel responsible for the output of their team and act to clear difficulties standing in their way....A team, therefore, is more than a collection of individuals. It is, in part, an emotional entity, rooted in the feelings as well as the thoughts of its members; they actively care about their team's well-being." The same article includes a list of characteristics of effective teams. One of those characteristics, "Effective Work Methods" is defined as "the team has developed lively, systematic and effective ways to solve problems together".
There are a variety of techniques that a team might employ to solve problems together. These include a formal vote (with some pre-established level required to move to action); submitting alternatives to an approving body; allowing the team leader to make the final decision; trying several solutions simultaneously (or on a pilot basis): delegating decision-making to some subset of the team. We believe that the consensus validation tool is one of the strongest and most effective tools a team can use to achieve its goals and to meet the requirement for effective work methods.
What is Consensus? Most often, a team's goal is to develop plans, products, suggestions or processes. The team wants to reach a point where all members stand behind the team’s work. Many teams are empowered to make a final decision on the project that has been assigned. Even if final authority is not vested, teams are faced with a range of decision-making issues as they plan and execute their work together. Any team's number one objective should be to reach decisions that reflect the thinking of all the team members in the best possible way. Consensus is NOT about a vote (unanimous, two-thirds, majority or otherwise). Consensus does NOT require the team member to conclude that if they had been given this task individually along with the decision making authority, this is exactly the conclusion they would have reached. Consensus does not mean that every team member is totally satisfied with the conclusion.
Consensus is the process of reaching a conclusion, recommendation, course of action or decision that all team members can support and that NO team member opposes.
In effect, if each team member can say, "I can and will support this conclusion, my ideas were expressed, heard and respected, I will not actively or passively (through inaction) oppose this effort", then consensus may be present. When they actually do say this and mean it, then consensus has been reached. However, all too often we think we have it when we don’t.
Reaching consensus is hard work. It takes time, enough time that all members of the team have the opportunity to express their views and question the ideas of others. It requires the active participation of every member of the group. That participation includes offering suggestions, asking questions, indicating concerns, challenging assumptions. Reaching consensus means the team will have to exercise skills in communications (listening, conflict resolution, facilitating discussion, patience, clarification) and will have to be open to the ideas of others and to creative, unusual, innovative approaches as well as the more traditional thoughts.
How does a team get to consensus? The first issue the team must consider is when to use consensus. There may be circumstances when unanimous agreement is required before the process moves forward. If the objective is to offer more than one alternative to an ultimate decision-maker, it may be acceptable to have a majority recommendation and one or more minority reports. In some groups, the norms or by-laws may specify that majority rules. In a consensus situation it may be that no one team member is completely satisfied with the decision or conclusion, but everyone can and will support it. However, by attaining consensus, the team is able to move forward to address the next step of its process or achieve a goal that could not be reached by any other technique.
There are a number of tools which teams can use to get to consensus. These tools are available in management texts or articles on the subject of decision-making tools for teams (see, for example, The Team Handbook by Scholtes and others). Briefly, they include:
Brainstorming....Most team members have participated in some form of brainstorming process (freewheeling, alternating, listing) but may have been less effective in the next steps. Once the brainstorming list is compiled the team needs to combine like ideas, eliminate suggestions that the group agrees clearly are outside of the task, refine the list of the leading options and then carefully examine the pros and cons of the "finalists".
Multi-voting....Identify a list of possible actions or ideas (for example, the agenda for today's meeting). Give each team member a number of votes to cast (typically half the total number of items). Each member then casts their votes among the Agenda items (ideas) listed (in any way they wish, all for one or each individually). The top vote getter becomes the first Agenda item for discussion (or is the idea that gets thoroughly examined) with the other ranking items forming the Agenda in priority order.
Consensus Validation: The purpose of the consensus validation tool is to verify that the team really has achieved consensus and is prepared to move on to the next step. While it is possible to define for a team what consensus means, and the behaviors that a team must apply to effectively reach a sound consensus, actually employing these behaviors is not always the way the team performs. The Validation tool is a quick, effective, and "safe" way to determine if your team really has reached consensus and is prepared to move on.
The group leader or facilitator develops a list of several questions which directly address the work the team has been doing. For example,
Do you personally agree that the team conclusion is one which you can actively support and will not oppose?
Do you believe that all the team members will actively support and not oppose the team conclusion?
Were your ideas heard and respected?
Do you believe all team members participated effectively in the discussion and that their ideas where heard and respected?
Ask each member of the team to number a blank piece of paper from 1-4 (or whatever number of questions you have) and then to rate each question on a scale of 1-9. On this scale 1 is low (for example, I don't support and will oppose the idea) and 9 is high (I absolutely support and won't oppose the idea). Collect all the responses, shuffle the papers and then redistribute them among team members (if the team is sitting at different tables, exchange the papers among the tables). The intent here is that no one has their own paper, or, at least, no one in the room is certain if anyone has their own paper.
On a flip chart, list the questions down the left side of the page and the numbers 1-9 across the top (forming a matrix). For each question, ask how many people have the number 1, then number 2 etc. on the paper they are holding and capture the results.
If all the team responded in the area of 7-9 on any question, there is a clear consensus and the team can move forward. If there are two or more team members in the 4-6 areas it indicates that the concept is generally acceptable, but there may be one or two aspects which need further discussion. If two or more team members are in the 1-3 range, there is a major problem either with the idea or with part of the team. The team does not have consensus and either needs further discussion or needs to alert the decision-maker to the issues.
Consensus validation is NOT about who! The intent is to determine whether consensus exists, and, if it does not, to identify the concerns or reservations that some members of the team hold. Consensus validation IS about WHY!
When validation fails, a process is implemented to determine the concerns which are being identified. The team needs to brainstorm (or write down on paper and submit for listing on the flip chart) reasons they feel may have led to the low scores. The question might be, "what issues would cause our team members to rate their ability to support the conclusion as a 1-2-3? what have we not considered carefully enough?". Every team member participates in the brainstorm or the input process. This means that the persons who actually provided the lower numbers will have a chance to anonymously submit their real reasons for concern along with the ideas of others. The team can now focus on these issues and resolve them without any individual being singled out for harassment or embarrassment.
Consensus validation has a wide range of uses; it is an effective team tool. It can certainly be used to validate whether the group is together on its major issue or question. But, it can also be used to test group effectiveness....are we working well as a team?, is everyone participating?; or as a check point on the group process....are we working on the right issues? is our timetable realistic?; or even, on the team assignment, are we the right team? is this the right issue? do we have the necessary resources to address our task?
Like any other tool, if used for the wrong purposes, or at the wrong time it may not be as productive. Like any other tool, if abused (used too often) it will
probably wear out. And like any other tool, it is the craftsperson using it that is more important than the tool itself.
Consensus Validation Rules:
1. It’s personal, each individual votes using a scale of 1-9.
2. It’s Anonymous (mix up ballots among the group, or turn them over to one person to tabulate; if the group is so small that handwriting might be recognized, make up ballots in advance and just have people circle or check the number they are selecting for each item).
3. Rule of Two...need at least two participants to record a vote that is significantly different from the rest of the team to stop the process and declare that consensus does not exist.
4. NEVER ask Who! Validation is about Why or What.
5. Solicit Reasons for Why or What that may be concerning team members. Use brainstorming or have suggestions submitted in writing and captured on a flip chart. The issue is....what are the barriers to the successful implementation of this idea?
6. Adjust the Plan as needed and do the consensus validation vote again.
7. Move on, reach the best possible decision and move forward.