Re: RE: Tom O (bagelhole1) posting

In a message dated 5/4/99 12:43:35 AM, zanmi002@tc.umn.edu writes:

<<While Tom O posits the merits of consensus as the basis for group decisions 
the reality of consensus based decision making is that those in power get 
to make the decisions.

Group think becomes the norm in consensus based organizational culture.  
The decision belongs to the person that is first with an alternative, is 
the loudest, slickest communicator, most connected, or most manipulative.

Come on Tom O -- you must have been in at least one decision making process 
that to have a different idea was to not be a team player.

Consensus works well for people that are located at the center and feel 
entitled to be listened to and agreed to.  What about those located on the 
periphery?


Mary C. Zanmiller
zanmi002@tc.umn.edu


Mary C. Zanmiller>>

Mary, I went to weekly meetings for 8 years where consensus was used, IMHO, 
quite successfully. Some of the points you raise can be a problem, but not as 
a rule, in least in SF Food Not Bombs. But it can be tricky, I agree. I was a 
part of consensus at the Nevada Peace Test protests a couple of years and I 
was thoroughly impressed by how great it worked. Also, at Redwood Summer 
Protests for the Headlands old growth, and at the Rainbow Gatherings. 
Awesome, awesome, awesome was my experience. Once even, I was the facilitator 
for an outdoor meeting in front  of City Hall  with about 100 people in the 
circle consisting of homeless, derelicts, and activists. It was challenging 
but it worked extremely well. Most people I know are very concious of your 
concerns and do everything possible to give everyone a fair chance of 
expressing themselves, also, individuals in the meeting are able to bring up 
these concerns if they feel that the loudest or most manipulative are 
dominating.
										
					In community,
										
					TomO (bagelhole1)
										
			<A 
HREF="http://bagelhole.hypermart.net/">http://bagelhole.hypermart.net/
</A>