A General Agreement Of Members Upon A Matter Of A Decision

Effective group decisions are a skill that can be learned. As a result, many large employees successfully use consensus to run their businesses and have developed innovative techniques to support and accelerate decision-making. If the group is constantly sharing the same issues, it may be time to check whether you are working more effectively than two separate groups. In a situation where some members are constantly in conflict with the rest of the group, it is worth checking whether they really agree with the essential objectives and, if not, whether it would be better for them to leave. While this can be painful for all concerned, it is usually better than trying to stay together and change each other. Ideally, you support each other and work together on common projects. In 2001, Robert Rocco Cottone published a consensual model of professional decision-making for consultants and psychologists. [69] Based on socio-constructivist philosophy, the model functions as a consensual model, as the clinician approaches ethical conflicts through a consensual negotiation process. Disputes are resolved by arbitrators who are chosen by mutual agreement and who are chosen at the beginning of the negotiation process. Even if a group does not want to organize hierarchically, there are almost always differences in people`s commitment, comfort and how they organize decisions that occur. Once an agenda for the discussion has been established and the framework rules of the meeting have been agreed as an option, each item on the agenda is dealt with successively.

As a general rule, any decision resulting from an agenda item follows a simple structure: you may simply not be the best at making a good decision together. B for example because trust is low, or you simply don`t have enough information to make the decision. In this case, try to resign from the concrete decision you want to make and spend more time creating the conditions for consensus or solving the practical problems that will be yours. It could be as simple as explaining the consensus to everyone during the meeting or sending someone to do a little more research and later reverse the decision. At other times, it will take more work – z.B one for one, a group of facilitated meetings and some social time together to build trust and open communication before making big decisions together. If we clarify the process, it will help people participate fully in decision-making and assure people that they will be heard. The consensus process in large groups can become very confusing, as it tends to be a little more complex and include more facilitation techniques. You agree with the discussion mandate: what decisions should be made and when? What are the most important questions? Can you break complex problems into small pieces to treat them one by one? Who should be involved in the decision? Do you expect, for example, to make a detailed decision at this point, or do you want to agree on a few principles and have the fine details developed by a small group? an agreement in which one party promises something, but the other party does not contain a written recording of the meeting to help people understand and remember what was decided.