Consensus is often seen as the gold standard for team decision-making in organizations.
The idea is simple and appealing: if everyone agrees, the decision must be sound. However, beneath this decision-making process lies potential for dysfunction that can undermine the very goals consensus seeks to achieve.
Under consensus decision-making, individual’s discontent can fester, creating a close-minded culture where growth is throttled. To avoid this outcome, it is better to create a collaborative culture supported by a blend of civility and conflict, with viewpoints and decisions supported by validated facts.
Here’s why…
The Illusion of Universal Agreement
One of the primary issues with consensus is the illusion it creates. In the pursuit of unanimity, individuals may suppress their true opinions to avoid conflict or to conform to the group’s dominant perspective. This phenomenon, known as “groupthink,” leads to poor decision-making and team members’ discontent as critical voices are stifled and alternative ideas are not explored.
The Tyranny of the Minority
Ironically, consensus can sometimes empower a vocal minority to hold sway over the less vocal or silent majority. In striving to reach full agreement, groups may bend over backward to accommodate dissenting opinions, no matter how fringe they may be. This can lead to compromises that dilute the effectiveness of the decision or result in choices that cater to the few at the expense of the many. This is a morale and team killer.
Slower Decision-Making
Consensus-building is inherently time-consuming. While taking time to deliberate can be beneficial, excessive delays can be detrimental, particularly in fast-paced environments where swift decisions are crucial. The need for prolonged discussions and negotiations can hinder responsiveness and agility, leaving organizations trailing behind more decisive competitors.
Diluted Accountability
When decisions are made by consensus, accountability can become blurred. If everyone is responsible, then no one is truly accountable. This diffusion of responsibility can lead to a lack of ownership, where individuals feel less compelled to ensure the success of the decision. In contrast, clear decision-making authority typically ensures that someone is accountable for the outcomes, good or bad.
Lack of Innovation
Innovation thrives on diversity of thought and the challenging of the status quo. Consensus, however, often favours yes-or-no decisions and the status quo, as new and disruptive ideas can be uncomfortable and require risk-taking. By striving for agreement, groups may inadvertently stifle creativity and discourage the kind of bold thinking necessary for breakthrough innovations.
Summing up Thoughts
While consensus may have merits in certain situations, lacking believability-weighting, it is not an effective decision-making process. The strategy can lead to dysfunctional outcomes that stifle innovation, dilute accountability, and slow down the decision-making process. To harness the true potential of group decisions, it is crucial to balance the benefits of consensus with the need for diverse perspectives, clear accountability, and timely action.