Getting A Concensus Isn't A Bad Thing

About a week ago I was talking to someone who's now a counselor, but was once a manager, about my as-yet unpublished book. We were talking about what I consider as the best type of manager, which is the consensus builder type. She disagreed with me, saying that in her opinion a person who tries to make everyone feel good will end up being ineffective in the long run, and that when she was a manager she didn't have the time to ask everyone for their opinions.

In my opinion, she highlighted what I consider is a misperception on what a consensus builder is supposed to be. She's absolutely right by saying that someone trying to please everybody will be ineffective. That's not what I consider a consensus builder at all. Depending on which dictionary you wish to use, you can either go by the definition of the word as "group solidarity in sentiment and belief" (Merriam-Webster) or "general agreement, especially in opinion" (New World).

I tend to agree with the second definition more, even though the first one isn't totally incorrect either. The prospect of trying for a consensus does not mean that everyone will agree with every word spoken that's said in a meeting. It also doesn't necessarily mean that once a meeting is over everyone will walk out happy and holding hands. What it does mean, though, is that you as the manager, or participant in a group discussion, will have had an opportunity to express your opinion, hopefully debate your points with as much logic and forethought as you were able to muster, allowed everyone else who has decided to participate to do the same, and now are ready to take everything that's been discussed and make the best decision based on everything that was presented.

As an employee, you may not feel as though you get to offer your opinions often enough when there are decisions that need to be made, or even if you feel no decisions had to be made. Truthfully, most employees don't know all of the issues of an organization, and therefore are kept out of the loop. However, there are times when decisions will have a direct impact on an employee's job process, and in those cases you deserve to be heard. It's always possible that someone wants to change a procedure for something you do every single day that really can't be done or isn't really workable, and the supervisor doesn't know it because they don't do the process on a daily basis. In those cases, an effective manager will recognize their shortcomings and get as much input from those who actually do the work before making what could be a disastrous decision.

As a manager, you're on the other side of this issue. On the one hand you might be included in some meetings that are going to affect the lives of your employees, and you may not be able to bring them in on the discussions because it may be harder for them to separate the personal issues from the professional issues. For instance, most people don't sit in on meetings where their position may be eliminated. On the other, if you're going to change how someone performs their duties and you haven't performed those same duties in some time, you may be making a big mistake, and not only because your not familiar with the process anymore. Even if you are, you might miss a great opportunity to allow those staff members who perform that exercise to not only help shape the procedure, but you'll be able to find out if some of them have either improved on the process or are actually making some major mistakes that need to be corrected.

For the second scenario above, gaining a consensus basically means establishing that something may need to be done in order to improve performance, and by showing everyone involved proper data that can be achieved. After that, even after obtaining all sides of an issue, the only true consensus a manager or leader should leave with is that they're going to consider all sides of an issue that was discussed. In the end, the decision lies with the manager because their reputation and position is on the line.

There are some truths that need to be said. One, just because everyone has an opinion doesn't mean everyone's right or wrong. The truth is that there may be varying degrees of right or wrong from every person in the room. Two, even the majority can be wrong. If the majority of people sharing information don't have enough background information to help make a good decision, you may not be able to rely on anything they have to offer. Three, if you as the manager decides that you're absolutely right, or want to do it your way anyway, to help keep the peace you should be able to explain the reasons why you want to do it your way. And four, if there are shades of gray and the decision you make doesn't have to be cast in stone forever, then it won't really matter as much because almost every plan of attack an organization or department decides to implement can always be modified. With enough information, you come as close as possible to making a pretty good decision.

So, what are the building blocks for gaining some kind of consensus? The first thing is to identify an issue that's important enough to talk to others about. The second is to get as much information on the problem as possible so that you can share it with others. The third is to take a few moments more to try to figure out what others might come up with to counter what you might suggest. If you don't have a particular opinion on what you may feel is the proper way to address the issue, try to come up with other points of view yourself and think of the pros and cons of each issue.

After you've all those steps, it's time to bring others into the discussion. Depending on how large of a group you wish to work with, it may or may not be logistical to bring in every person in the department. You want to make sure that you give everyone in your department a chance to participate in some of your departmental processes, but that doesn't mean everyone has to be at every meeting. Once you've gotten whatever group of people together you feel is proper, whether it's folks who report to you or your peers in other departments, or even a cross section of employees throughout the organization, the next step is to lay out your issue and the facts as you know them. It doesn't do you any good to withhold any information to use later on to counter what someone else may say; lay it on the table up front and those who are in the meeting with you will know that you've researched it and thought about it fairly well before bringing them all in. Then sit back and listen, becoming more of a facilitator than a participant for awhile, working more on keeping the conversation going than anything else.

You may not realize it, but at this point you've already established the consensus. You have brought people together, established a rapport with them, laid out your issue, and if the participants in the group begin discussing the issue, they have, in essence, agreed that there was a legitimate purpose for getting together. If you take what you hear and come up with what you feel is the best decision for all at the end of the process, you have still achieved your consensus, whether everyone agrees with the final decision or not. You just might find that everybody completely agrees with what you've suggested; could there be a bigger high than that?



Click here to return to newsletters page