On Conflict and Consensus

On Conflict and Consensus

A Handbook on Formal Consensus Decisionmaking

C. T. Lawrence Butler Amy Rothstein

1987-2007

License and Attributions

The text of this book was written by C.T. Lawrence Butler and Amy Rothstein, copyright

c 1987-2007 by C.T. Butler.

Cover art on the printed version is by Keith McHenry.

The owchart in _gure 2.1 is a product of collaboration between C.T. Butler, Nathaniel

White, and Gavin White, and contains material and/or design that is copyright c 2007

by each of them.

The layout of this third edition was done by Gavin White in 2007 using the LATEX type-

setting engine.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share

Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-

nc-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San

Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Third Edition | Thirteenth Printing

Acknowledgments

Consensus, as a decisionmaking process, has been developing for centuries. Many peo-

ple, in diverse communities, have contributed to this development. From them, we have

borrowed generously and adapted freely.

The following friends previewed drafts of this book and have contributed their ideas

and suggestions as it developed. Their contributions and support are greatly appreciated.

T. Rahbert Anderson

Chris Austill

Athena Bradley

Diana Bradley

Beth Brown

Dakota Butter_eld

David Casey

Merit Cudkowicz

Karen Dobak

Su Eaton

Brian Feigenbaum

David Friedman

Sage Friedman

David Grosser

Cathy Ho_man

John Ho_man

Jasmine

Mareba Jos

Elizabeth McDaniels

Keith McHenry

Daniel Melnechuk

Eve Melnechuk

Paul Miller

Drake A. Mitchell

Anthony Scott Mize

Tess Ouellette

Matthew Schreiner

P.A. Trisha

Deborah Welsh

Gavin White

Nathaniel White

Yoda

iii

On War and Peace

If war is the violent resolution of conict,

then peace is not the absence of conict,

but rather,

the ability to resolve conict without violence.

| C.T. Lawrence Butler

v

Contents

List of Figures xi

I On Conict and Consensus 1

1 Introduction 3

1.1 Group Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2 Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2 On Decisionmaking 11

2.1 The Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.2 The Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.3 The Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3 On Conict & Consensus 21

3.1 Foundations of Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.2 Impediments To Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4 The Art of Evaluation 27

4.1 Purpose of evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.2 Uses of evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

4.3 Types of evaluation questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5 Roles 31

5.1 Agenda Planners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5.2 Facilitator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

5.3 Peacekeeper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

5.4 Advocate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

5.5 Timekeeper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

5.6 Public Scribe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

vii

5.7 Notetaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

5.8 Doorkeeper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

6 Techniques 41

6.1 Facilitation Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

6.1.1 Equalizing Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

6.1.2 Listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1.3 Stacking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1.4 Pacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1.5 Checking the Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1.6 Silence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1.7 Taking a Break . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6.1.8 Call For Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6.1.9 Summarizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6.1.10 Reformulating the Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6.1.11 Stepping out of Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

6.1.12 Passing the Clipboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6.1.13 Polling (Straw Polls) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6.1.14 Censoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6.1.15 Expulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6.2 Group Discussion Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6.2.1 Identi_cation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6.2.2 Whole Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6.2.3 Small Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

6.2.4 Brainstorming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

6.2.5 Go-rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

6.2.6 Fishbowl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

6.2.7 Active Listening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

6.2.8 Caucusing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

II Four Founding Documents 49

1 Vision Statement 53

2 Principles 55

3 Bylaws 57

4 Structure 65

III Essays 77

1 Consensus Revisited 79

2 Revolutionary Process 81

Glossary 85

Bibliography 87

Index 89

About the Author 91

List of Figures

2.1 The Formal Consensus Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

5.1 Standard Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

xi

Preface

Originally, C.T. wrote this book for the Pledge of Resistance in Boston when it had

over 3500 signers and 150 a_nity groups. All policy decisions for the organization

were made at monthly spokesmeetings, involving at least one spokesperson from

each a_nity group. Members from the coordinating committee were charged with

managing daily a_airs. Spokesmeetings were often attended by over one hundred

people; they were usually seventy strong. For almost two years the process of

consensus worked well for the Pledge, empowering very large numbers of people

to engage con_dently in nonviolent direct action. The forerunner of the model of

consensus outlined in this book was used throughout this period at spokesmeetings

and, particularly well, at the weekly coordinators meetings. However, it was never

systematically de_ned and written down or formally adopted.

For over two years, C.T. attended monthly spokesmeetings, weekly coordinat-

ing meetings, and uncounted committee meetings. He saw the need to develop

a consistent way to introduce new members to consensus. At _rst, he looked for

existing literature to aid in conducting workshops on the consensus process. He

was unable to _nd any suitable material, so he set out to develop his own.

The _rst edition of this book is the result of a year of research into consensus

in general and the Pledge process in particular. It was mostly distributed to

individuals who belonged to various groups already struggling to use some form

of consensus process. The fourth printing included an introduction which added

the concept of secular consensus. The secular label distinguishes this model of

consensus from both the more traditional model found in faith-based communities

and the rather informal consensus commonly found in progressive groups.

Unfortunately, the label of secular consensus gave the impression that we were

denying any connection with spirituality. We wanted to clearly indicate that the

model of consensus we were proposing was distinct, but we did not want to exclude

the valuable work of faith-based communities.

Therefore, since the sixth printing we have used the name Formal Consensus

because it adequately de_nes this distinction. We hope that Formal Consensus

xiii

will continue to be an important contribution to the search for an e_ective, more

unifying, democratic decisionmaking process.

Formal Consensus is a speci_c kind of decisionmaking. It must be de_ned by

the group using it. It provides a foundation, structure, and collection of techniques

for e_cient and productive group discussions. The foundation is the commonly-

held principles and decisions which created the group originally. The structure is

predetermined, although exible. The agenda is formal and extremely important.

the roles, techniques, and skills necessary for smooth operation must be accessible

to and developed in all members. Evaluation of the process must happen on a

consistent and frequent basis, as a tool for self-education and self-management.

Above all, Formal Consensus must be taught. It is unreasonable to expect people

to be familiar with this process already. In general, nonviolent conict resolution

does not exist in modern North American society. These skills must be developed

in what is primarily a competitive environment. Only time will tell if, in fact, this

model will ourish and prove itself e_ective and worthwhile.

We are now convinced more than ever that the model presented in this book

is profoundly signi_cant for the future of our species. We must learn to live to-

gether cooperatively, resolving our conicts nonviolently and making our decisions

consensually. We must learn to value diversity and respect all life, not just on a

physical level, but emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually. We are all in this

together.

C.T. Butler

Amy Rothstein

August 1991

Part I

On Conict and Consensus

1

Chapter 1

Introduction: The Advantages

of Formal Consensus

There are many ways to make decisions. Sometimes, the most e_cient way

to make decisions is to just let the manager (or CEO, or dictator) make them.

However, e_ciency is not the only criterion. When choosing a decisionmaking

method, one needs to ask two questions. Is it a fair process? Does it produce

good solutions?

To judge the process, consider the following: Does the meeting ow

smoothly? Is the discussion kept to the point? Does it take too long to

make each decision? Does the leadership determine the outcome of the dis-

cussion? Are some people overlooked?

To judge the quality of the end result, the decision, consider: Are the

people making the decision, and all those a_ected, satis_ed with the result?

To what degree is the intent of the original proposal accomplished? Are the

underlying issues addressed? Is there an appropriate use of resources? Would

the group make the same decision again?

Autocracy can work, but the idea of a benevolent dictator is just a dream.

We believe that it is inherently better to involve every person who is a_ected

by the decision in the decisionmaking process. This is true for several reasons.

The decision would reect the will of the entire group, not just the leadership.

The people who carry out the plans will be more satis_ed with their work.

And, as the old adage goes, two heads are better than one.

This book presents a particular model for decisionmaking we call Formal

Consensus. Formal Consensus has a clearly de_ned structure. It requires a

commitment to active cooperation, disciplined speaking and listening, and

3

4 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

respect for the contributions of every member. Likewise, every person has

the responsibility to actively participate as a creative individual within the

structure.

Avoidance, denial, and repression of conict is common during meetings.

Therefore, using Formal Consensus might not be easy at _rst. Unresolved

conict from previous experiences could come rushing forth and make the

process di_cult, if not impossible. Practice and discipline, however, will

smooth the process. The bene_t of everyone's participation and cooperation

is worth the struggle it may initially take to ensure that all voices are heard.

It is often said that consensus is time-consuming and di_cult. Making

complex, di_cult decisions is time-consuming, no matter what the process.

Many di_erent methods can be e_cient, if every participant shares a common

understanding of the rules of the game. Like any process, Formal Consen-

sus can be ine_cient if a group does not _rst assent to follow a particular

structure.

This book codi_es a formal structure for decisionmaking. It is hoped that

the relationship between this book and Formal Consensus would be similar

to the relationship between Robert's Rules of Order and Parliamentary Pro-

cedure.

Methods of decisionmaking can be seen on a continuum with one person

having total authority on one end and sharing power and responsibility on

the other.

The level of participation increases along this decisionmaking continuum.

Oligarchies and autocracies o_er no participation to many of those who are

directly a_ected. Representative, majority rule, and consensus democracies

involve everybody, to di_erent degrees.

1.1 Group Dynamics

A group, by de_nition, is a number of individuals having some unifying

relationship. The group dynamic created by consensus process is completely

di_erent from that of Parliamentary Procedure, from start to _nish. It is

based on di_erent values and uses a di_erent language, a di_erent structure,

and many di_erent techniques, although some techniques overlap. It might be

helpful to explain some broad concepts about group dynamics and consensus.

1.1. GROUP DYNAMICS 5

Conict

While decisionmaking is as much about conict as it is about agreement,

Formal Consensus works best in an atmosphere in which conict is encour-

aged, supported, and resolved cooperatively with respect, nonviolence, and

creativity. Conict is desirable. It is not something to be avoided, dismissed,

diminished, or denied.

Majority Rule and Competition

Generally speaking, when a group votes using majority rule or Parliamentary

Procedure, a competitive dynamic is created within the group because it

is being asked to choose between two (or more) possibilities. It is just as

acceptable to attack and diminish another's point of view as it is to promote

and endorse your own ideas. Often, voting occurs before one side reveals

anything about itself, but spends time solely attacking the opponent! In this

adversarial environment, one's ideas are owned and often defended in the

face of improvements.

Consensus and Cooperation

Consensus process, on the other hand, creates a cooperative dynamic. Only

one proposal is considered at a time. Everyone works together to make it the

best possible decision for the group. Any concerns are raised and resolved,

sometimes one by one, until all voices are heard. Since proposals are no longer

the property of the presenter, a solution can be created more cooperatively.

Proposals

In the consensus process, only proposals which intend to accomplish the

common purpose are considered. During discussion of a proposal, everyone

works to improve the proposal to make it the best decision for the group.

All proposals are adopted unless the group decides it is contrary to the best

interests of the group.

6 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.2 Characteristics

of Formal Consensus

Before a group decides to use Formal Consensus, it must honestly assess its

ability to honor the principles described in Chapter Three. If the principles

described in this book are not already present or if the group is not willing to

work to create them, then Formal Consensus will not be possible. Any group

which wants to adopt Formal Consensus needs to give considerable attention

to the underlying principles which support consensus and help the process

operate smoothly. This is not to say each and every one of the principles

described herein must be adopted by every group, or that each group cannot

add its own principles speci_c to its goals, but rather, each group must be

very clear about the foundation of principles or common purposes they choose

before they attempt the Formal Consensus decisionmaking process.

Formal Consensus is the least violent decisionmaking

process.

Traditional nonviolence theory holds that the use of power to dominate is

violent and undesirable. Nonviolence expects people to use their power to

persuade without deception, coercion, or malice, using truth, creativity, logic,

respect, and love. Majority rule voting process and Parliamentary Procedure

both accept, and even encourage, the use of power to dominate others. The

goal is the winning of the vote, often regardless of another choice which might

be in the best interest of the whole group. The will of the majority super-

sedes the concerns and desires of the minority. This is inherently violent.

Consensus strives to take into account everyone's concerns and resolve them

before any decision is made. Most importantly, this process encourages an

environment in which everyone is respected and all contributions are valued.

Formal Consensus is the most democratic decisionmak-

ing process.

Groups which desire to involve as many people as possible need to use an

inclusive process. To attract and involve large numbers, it is important that

the process encourages participation, allows equal access to power, develops

cooperation, promotes empowerment, and creates a sense of individual re-

1.2. CHARACTERISTICS 7

sponsibility for the group's actions. All of these are cornerstones of Formal

Consensus. The goal of consensus is not the selection of several options, but

the development of one decision which is the best for the whole group. It is

synthesis and evolution, not competition and attrition.

Formal Consensus is based on the principles of the group.

Although every individual must consent to a decision before it is adopted,

if there are any objections, it is not the choice of the individual alone to

determine if an objection prevents the proposal from being adopted. Ev-

ery objection or concern must _rst be presented before the group and either

resolved or validated. A valid objection is one in keeping with all previ-

ous decisions of the group and based upon the commonly-held principles or

foundation adopted by the group. The objection must not only address the

concerns of the individual, but it must also be in the best interest of the

group as a whole. If the objection is not based upon the foundation, or

is in contradiction with a prior decision, it is not valid for the group, and

therefore, out of order.

Formal Consensus is desirable in larger groups.

If the structure is vague, decisions can be di_cult to achieve. They will

become increasingly more di_cult in larger groups. Formal Consensus is de-

signed for large groups. It is a highly structured model. It has guidelines

and formats for managing meetings, facilitating discussions, resolving con-

ict, and reaching decisions. Smaller groups may need less structure, so they

may choose from the many techniques and roles suggested in this book.

Formal consensus works better when more people par-

ticipate.

Consensus is more than the sum total of ideas of the individuals in the group.

During discussion, ideas build one upon the next, generating new ideas, until

the best decision emerges. This dynamic is called the creative interplay of

ideas. Creativity plays a major part as everyone strives to discover what is

best for the group. The more people involved in this cooperative process,

the more ideas and possibilities are generated. Consensus works best with

8 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

everyone participating. (This assumes, of course, that everyone in the group

is trained in Formal Consensus and is actively using it.)

Formal Consensus is not inherently time-consuming.

Decisions are not an end in themselves. Decisionmaking is a process which

starts with an idea and ends with the actual implementation of the decision.

While it may be true in an autocratic process that decisions can be made

quickly, the actual implementation will take time. When one person or a

small group of people makes a decision for a larger group, the decision not

only has to be communicated to the others, but it also has to be acceptable

to them or its implementation will need to be forced upon them. This will

certainly take time, perhaps a considerable amount of time. On the other

hand, if everyone participates in the decisionmaking, the decision does not

need to be communicated and its implementation does not need to be forced

upon the participants. The decision may take longer to make, but once it is

made, implementation can happen in a timely manner. The amount of time

a decision takes to make from start to _nish is not a factor of the process

used; rather, it is a factor of the complexity of the proposal itself. An easy

decision takes less time than a di_cult, complex decision, regardless of the

process used or the number of people involved. Of course, Formal Consensus

works better if one practices patience, but any process is improved with a

generous amount of patience.

Formal Consensus cannot be secretly disrupted.

This may not be an issue for some groups, but many people know that the

state actively surveils, in_ltrates, and disrupts nonviolent domestic political

and religious groups. To counteract anti-democratic tactics by the state, a

group would need to develop and encourage a decisionmaking process which

could not be covertly controlled or manipulated. Formal Consensus, if prac-

ticed as described in this book, is just such a process. Since the assumption

is one of cooperation and good will, it is always appropriate to ask for an

explanation of how and why someone's actions are in the best interest of the

group. Disruptive behavior must not be tolerated. While it is true this pro-

cess cannot prevent openly disruptive behavior, the point is to prevent covert

disruption, hidden agenda, and malicious manipulation of the process. Any

1.2. CHARACTERISTICS 9

group for which in_ltration is a threat ought to consider the process outlined

in this book if it wishes to remain open, democratic, and productive.

Chapter 2

On Decisionmaking

Decisions are adopted when all participants consent to the result of discus-

sion about the original proposal. People who do not agree with a proposal

are responsible for expressing their concerns. No decision is adopted until

there is resolution of every concern. When concerns remain after discussion,

individuals can agree to disagree by acknowledging that they have unresolved

concerns, but consent to the proposal anyway and allow it to be adopted.

Therefore, reaching consensus does not assume that everyone must be in com-

plete agreement, a highly unlikely situation in a group of intelligent, creative

individuals.

Consensus is becoming popular as a democratic form of decisionmaking.

It is a process which requires an environment in which all contributions are

valued and participation is encouraged. There are, however, few organiza-

tions which use a model of consensus which is speci_c, consistent, and e_-

cient. Often, the consensus process is informal, vague, and very inconsistent.

This happens when the consensus process is not based upon a solid founda-

tion and the structure is unknown or nonexistent. To develop a more formal

type of consensus process, any organization must de_ne the commonly held

principles which form the foundation of the group's work and intentionally

choose the type of structure within which the process is built.

This book contains the building materials for just such a process. In-

cluded is a description of the principles from which a foundation is created,

the owchart and levels of structure which are the frame for the process, and

the other materials needed for designing a variety of processes which can be

customized to _t the needs of the organization.

11

12 CHAPTER 2. ON DECISIONMAKING

2.1 The Structure

of Formal Consensus

Many groups regularly use diverse discussion techniques learned from prac-

titioners in the _eld of conict resolution. Although this book does include

several techniques, the book is about a structure called Formal Consensus.

This structure creates a separation between the identi_cation and the reso-

lution of concerns. Perhaps, if everybody in the group has no trouble saying

what they think, they won't need this structure. This predictable structure

provides opportunities to those who don't feel empowered to participate.

Formal Consensus is presented in levels or cycles. In the _rst level, the

idea is to allow everyone to express their perspective, including concerns, but

group time is not spent on resolving problems. In the second level the group

focuses its attention on identifying concerns, still not resolving them. This

requires discipline. Reactive comments, even funny ones, and resolutions,

even good ones, can suppress the creative ideas of others. Not until the third

level does the structure allow for exploring resolutions.

Each level has a di_erent scope and focus. At the _rst level, the scope

is broad, allowing the discussion to consider the philosophical and political

implications as well as the general merits and drawbacks and other relevant

information. The only focus is on the proposal as a whole. Some decisions can

be reached after discussion at the _rst level. At the second level, the scope

of the discussion is limited to the concerns. They are identi_ed and publicly

listed, which enables everyone to get an overall picture of the concerns. The

focus of attention is on identifying the body of concerns and grouping similar

ones. At the third level, the scope is very narrow. The focus of discussion is

limited to a single unresolved concern until it is resolved.

2.2 The Flow

of Formal Consensus

In an ideal situation, every proposal would be submitted in writing and briey

introduced the _rst time it appears on the agenda. At the next meeting, after

everyone has had enough time to read it and carefully consider any concerns,

the discussion would begin in earnest. Often, it would not be until the third

2.2. THE FLOW 13

meeting that a decision is made. Of course, this depends upon how many

proposals are on the table and the urgency of the decision.

Clarify the Process

The facilitator introduces the person presenting the proposal and gives a

short update on any previous action on it. It is very important for the

facilitator to explain the process which brought this proposal to the meeting,

and to describe the process that will be followed to move the group through

the proposal to consensus. It is the facilitator's job to make sure that every

participant clearly understands the structure and the discussion techniques

being employed while the meeting is in progress.

Present Proposal or Issue

When possible and appropriate, proposals ought to be prepared in writing

and distributed well in advance of the meeting in which a decision is required.

This encourages prior discussion and consideration, helps the presenter an-

ticipate concerns, minimizes surprises, and involves everyone in creating the

proposal. (If the necessary groundwork has not been done, the wisest choice

might be to send the proposal to committee. Proposal writing is di_cult

to accomplish in a large group. The committee would develop the proposal

for consideration at a later time.) The presenter reads the written proposal

aloud, provides background information, and states clearly its bene_ts and

reasons for adoption, including addressing any existing concerns.

Questions Which Clarify the Presentation

Questions are strictly limited by the facilitator to those which seek greater

comprehension of the proposal as presented. Everyone deserves the opportu-

nity to fully understand what is being asked of the group before discussion

begins. This is not a time for comments or concerns. If there are only a few

questions, they can be answered one at a time by the person presenting the

proposal. If there are many, a useful technique is hearing all the questions

_rst, then answering them together. After answering all clarifying questions,

the group begins discussion.

14 CHAPTER 2. ON DECISIONMAKING

Level One: Broad Open Discussion

General Discussion

Discussion at this level ought to be the broadest in scope. Try to encourage

comments which take the whole proposal into account; i.e., why it is a good

idea, or general problems which need to be addressed. Discussion at this level

often has a philosophical or principled tone, purposely addressing how this

proposal might a_ect the group in the long run or what kind of precedent

it might create, etc. It helps every proposal to be discussed in this way,

before the group engages in resolving particular concerns. Do not allow one

concern to become the focus of the discussion. When particular concerns are

raised, make note of them but encourage the discussion to move back to the

proposal as a whole. Encourage the creative interplay of comments and ideas.

Allow for the addition of any relevant factual information. For those who

might at _rst feel opposed to the proposal, this discussion is consideration

of why it might be good for the group in the broadest sense. Their initial

concerns might, in fact, be of general concern to the whole group. And, for

those who initially support the proposal, this is a time to think about the

proposal broadly and some of the general problems. If there seems to be

general approval of the proposal, the facilitator, or someone recognized to

speak, can request a call for consensus.

Call for Consensus

The facilitator asks, \Are there any unresolved concerns?" or \Are there any

concerns remaining?" After a period of silence, if no additional concerns are

raised, the facilitator declares that consensus is reached and the proposal is

read for the record. The length of silence ought to be directly related to the

degree of di_culty in reaching consensus; an easy decision requires a short

silence, a di_cult decision requires a longer silence. This encourages everyone

to be at peace in accepting the consensus before moving on to other business.

At this point, the facilitator assigns task responsibilities or sends the decision

to a committee for implementation. It is important to note that the question

is not \Is there consensus?" or \Does everyone agree?" These questions do

not encourage an environment in which all concerns can be expressed. If

some people have a concern, but are shy or intimidated by a strong showing

of support for a proposal, the question \Are there any unresolved concerns?"

speaks directly to them and provides an opportunity for them to speak. Any

2.2. THE FLOW 15

concerns for which someone stands aside are listed with the proposal and

become a part of it.

Level Two: Identify Concerns

List Any Concerns

At the beginning of the next level, a discussion technique called brainstorming

(see section 6.2.4) is used so that concerns can be identi_ed and written

down publicly by the scribe and for the record by the notetaker. Be sure the

scribe is as accurate as possible by checking with the person who voiced the

concern before moving on. This is not a time to attempt to resolve concerns

or determine their validity. That would stie free expression of concerns. At

this point, only concerns are to be expressed, reasonable or unreasonable,

well thought out or vague feelings. The facilitator wants to interrupt any

comments which attempt to defend the proposal, resolve the concerns, judge

the value of the concerns, or in any way deny or dismiss another's feelings of

doubt or concern. Sometimes simply allowing a concern to be expressed and

written down helps resolve it. After most concerns have been listed, allow

the group a moment to reect on them as a whole.

Aggregate Related Concerns

At this point, the focus is on identifying patterns and relationships between

concerns. This short exercise must not be allowed to focus upon or resolve

any particular concern.

Level Three: Resolve Concerns

Resolve Groups of Related Concerns

Often, related concerns can be resolved as a group.

Call for Consensus

If most of the concerns seem to have been resolved, call for consensus in the

manner described earlier. If some concerns have not been resolved at this

time, then a more focused discussion is needed.

16 CHAPTER 2. ON DECISIONMAKING

Restate Remaining Concerns (One at a Time)

Return to the list. The facilitator checks each one with the group and removes

ones which have been resolved or are, for any reason, no longer of concern.

Each remaining concern is restated clearly and concisely and addressed one

at a time. Sometimes new concerns are raised which need to be added to the

list. Every individual is responsible for honestly expressing concerns as they

think of them. It is not appropriate to hold back a concern and spring it upon

the group late in the process. This undermines trust and limits the group's

ability to adequately discuss the concern in its relation to other concerns.

Questions Which Clarify the Concern

The facilitator asks for any questions or comments which would further clarify

the concern so everyone clearly understands it before discussion starts.

Discussion Limited to Resolving One Concern

Use as many creative group discussion techniques as needed to facilitate a

resolution for each concern. Keep the discussion focused upon the particular

concern until every suggestion has been o_ered. If no new ideas are coming

forward and the concern cannot be resolved, or if the time allotted for this

item has been entirely used, move to one of the closing options described

below.

Call for Consensus

Repeat this process until all concerns have been resolved. At this point,

the group should be at consensus, but it would be appropriate to call for

consensus anyway just to be sure no concern has been overlooked.

Closing Options

Send to Committee

If a decision on the proposal can wait until the whole group meets again, then

send the proposal to a committee which can clarify the concerns and bring

new, creative resolutions for consideration by the group. It is a good idea to

include on the committee representatives of all the major concerns, as well as

those most supportive of the proposal so they can work out solutions in a less

2.3. THE RULES 17

formal setting. Sometimes, if the decision is needed before the next meeting,

a smaller group can be empowered to make the decision for the larger group,

but again, this committee should include all points of view. Choose this

option only if it is absolutely necessary and the whole group consents.

Stand Aside (decision adopted with unresolved concerns listed)

When a concern has been fully discussed and cannot be resolved, it is appro-

priate for the facilitator to ask those persons with this concern if they are

willing to stand aside; that is, acknowledge that the concern still exists, but

allow the proposal to be adopted. It is very important for the whole group

to understand that this unresolved concern is then written down with the

proposal in the record and, in essence, becomes a part of the decision. This

concern can be raised again and deserves more discussion time as it has not

yet been resolved. In contrast, a concern which has been resolved in past

discussion does not deserve additional discussion, unless something new has

developed. Filibustering is not appropriate in Formal Consensus.

Declare Block

After having spent the allotted agenda time moving through the three levels

of discussion trying to achieve consensus and concerns remain which are

unresolved, the facilitator is obligated to declare that consensus cannot be

reached at this meeting, that the proposal is blocked, and move on to the

next agenda item.

2.3 The Rules

of Formal Consensus

The guidelines and techniques in this book are exible and meant to be

modi_ed. Some of the guidelines, however, seem almost always to be true.

These are the Rules of Formal Consensus:

1. Once a decision has been adopted by consensus, it cannot be changed

without reaching a new consensus. If a new consensus cannot be

reached, the old decision stands.

18 CHAPTER 2. ON DECISIONMAKING

2. In general, only one person has permission to speak at any moment.

The person with permission to speak is determined by the group discus-

sion technique in use and/or the facilitator. (The role of Peacekeeper

is exempt from this rule.)

3. All structural decisions (i.e., which roles to use, who _lls each role, and

which facilitation technique and/or group discussion technique to use)

are adopted by consensus without debate. Any objection automatically

causes a new selection to be made. If a role cannot be _lled without

objection, the group proceeds without that role being _lled. If much

time is spent trying to _ll roles or _nd acceptable techniques, then the

group needs a discussion about the unity of purpose of this group and

why it is having this problem, a discussion which must be put on the

agenda for the next meeting, if not held immediately.

4. All content decisions (i.e., the agenda contract, committee reports, pro-

posals, etc.) are adopted by consensus after discussion. Every content

decision must be openly discussed before it can be tested for consensus.

5. A concern must be based upon the principles of the group to justify a

block to consensus.

6. Every meeting which uses Formal Consensus must have an evaluation.

2.3. THE RULES 19

Figure 2.1: The Formal Consensus Flow Chart

List Any Concerns

Aggregate Related Concerns

Clarify Process

Present Proposal or Issue

Group Discussion

Resolve Aggregated Concerns

Restate Remaining Concerns

Questions to Clarify Concerns

Discussion Limited to Resolving

One Concern at a Time

Call for Consensus

Call for Consensus

Call for Consensus

Questions to Clarify Presentation

Introductions

Level 1

Broad Open Discussion

Level 2

Identify Concerns

Level 3

Resolve Concerns

Consensus

Send to Committee Stand Aside Declare Block

Closing Options

Basic Roles:

Facilitator: Moves group

between Levels, organizes

discussion, calls for consensus

Notetaker: Makes notes of the

meeting, records all decisions

verbatim

Public Scribe: Writes

proposals, concerns,

resolutions, etc. for all to see

Timekeeper: Manages time

for group

Doorkeeper: Greets people,

manages the space for group

When the Facilitator Calls

for Consensus, you can:

Remain Silent: Indicates

willingness to adopt the

proposal, as is.

Stand Aside: Declare that,

even though you have

unresolved concerns, because

you believe the proposal

matches the group's values,

you accept adoption of it.

Withhold consent: You

believe this proposal violates

the purpose or values of the

group; therefore, you cannot

accept adoption of it.

The Call for Consensus:

"Are there any

unresolved concerns?"

If silence,

declare the proposal adopted.

If yes,

then move to another Level or

make use of a Closing Option.

Chapter 3

On Conict & Consensus

Conict is usually viewed as an impediment to reaching agreements and

disruptive to peaceful relationships. However, it is the underlying thesis

of Formal Consensus that nonviolent conict is necessary and desirable. It

provides the motivations for improvement. The challenge is the creation of

an understanding in all who participate that conict, or di_ering opinions

about proposals, is to be expected and acceptable. Do not avoid or repress

conict. Create an environment in which disagreement can be expressed

without fear. Objections and criticisms can be heard not as attacks, not as

attempts to defeat a proposal, but as a concern which, when resolved, will

make the proposal stronger.

This understanding of conict may not be easily accepted by the mem-

bers of a group. Our training by society undermines this concept. Therefore,

it will not be easy to create the kind of environment where di_erences can

be expressed without fear or resentment. But it can be done. It will re-

quire tolerance and a willingness to experiment. Additionally, the values and

principles which form the basis of commitment to work together to resolve

conict need to be clearly de_ned, and accepted by all involved.

If a group desires to adopt Formal Consensus as its decisionmaking pro-

cess, the _rst step is the creation of a Statement of Purpose or Constitution.

This document would describe not only the common purpose, but would also

include the de_nition of the group's principles and values. If the group dis-

cusses and writes down its foundation of principles at the start, it is much

easier to determine group versus individual concerns later on.

The following are principles which form the foundation of Formal Con-

sensus. A commitment to these principles and/or a willingness to develop

21

22 CHAPTER 3. ON CONFLICT & CONSENSUS

them is necessary. In addition to the ones listed herein, the group might add

principles and values which are speci_c to its purpose.

3.1 Foundation Upon Which

Consensus Is Built

For consensus to work well, the process must be conducted in an environment

which promotes trust, respect, and skill sharing. The following are principles

which, when valued and respected, encourage and build consensus.

Trust

Foremost is the need for trust. Without some amount of trust, there will be

no cooperation or nonviolent resolution to conict. For trust to ourish, it is

desirable for individuals to be willing to examine their attitudes and be open

to new ideas. Acknowledgment and appreciation of personal and cultural

di_erences promote trust. Neither approval nor friendship are necessary for

a good working relationship. By developing trust, the process of consensus

encourages the intellectual and emotional development of the individuals

within a group.

Respect

It is everyone's responsibility to show respect to one another. People feel

respected when everyone listens, when they are not interrupted, when their

ideas are taken seriously. Respect for emotional as well as logical concerns

promotes the kind of environment necessary for developing consensus. To

promote respect, it is important to distinguish between an action which

causes a problem and the person who did the action, between the deed and

the doer. We must criticize the act, not the person. Even if you think the

person is the problem, responding that way never resolves anything.

Unity of Purpose

Unity of purpose is a basic understanding about the goals and purpose of

the group. Of course, there will be varying opinions on the best way to

3.1. FOUNDATIONS OF CONSENSUS 23

accomplish these goals. However, there must be a unifying base, a common

starting point, which is recognized and accepted by all.

Nonviolence

Nonviolent decisionmakers use their power to achieve goals while respecting

di_erences and cooperating with others. In this environment, it is considered

violent to use power to dominate or control the group process. It is under-

stood that the power of revealing your truth is the maximum force allowed

to persuade others to your point of view.

Self Empowerment

It is easy for people to unquestioningly rely on authorities and experts to do

their thinking and decisionmaking for them. If members of a group delegate

their authority, intentionally or not, they fail to accept responsibility for the

group's decisions. Consensus promotes and depends upon self empowerment.

Anyone can express concerns. Everyone seeks creative solutions and is re-

sponsible for every decision. When all are encouraged to participate, the

democratic nature of the process increases.

Cooperation

Unfortunately, Western society is saturated in competition. When winning

arguments becomes more important than achieving the group's goals, coop-

eration is di_cult, if not impossible. Adversarial attitudes toward proposals

or people focus attention on weakness rather than strength. An attitude

of helpfulness and support builds cooperation. Cooperation is a shared re-

sponsibility in _nding solutions to all concerns. Ideas o_ered in the spirit of

cooperation help resolve conict. The best decisions arise through an open

and creative interplay of ideas.

Conict Resolution

The free ow of ideas, even among friends, inevitably leads to conict. In

this context, conict is simply the expression of disagreement. Disagreement

itself is neither good nor bad. Diverse viewpoints bring into focus and explore

the strengths and weaknesses of attitudes, assumptions, and plans. Without

24 CHAPTER 3. ON CONFLICT & CONSENSUS

conict, one is less likely to think about and evaluate one's views and preju-

dices. There is no right decision, only the best one for the whole group. The

task is to work together to discover which choice is most acceptable to all

members.

Avoid blaming anyone for conict. Blame is inherently violent. It attacks

dignity and empowerment. It encourages people to feel guilty, defensive, and

alienated. The group will lose its ability to resolve conict. People will hide

their true feelings to avoid being blamed for the conict.

Avoidance of conicting ideas impedes resolution for failure to explore and

develop the feelings that gave rise to the conict. The presence of conict

can create an occasion for growth. Learn to use it as a catalyst for discov-

ering creative resolutions and for developing a better understanding of each

other. With patience, anyone can learn to resolve conict creatively, without

defensiveness or guilt. Groups can learn to nurture and support their mem-

bers in this e_ort by allowing creativity and experimentation. This process

necessitates that the group continually evaluate and improve these skills.

Commitment to the Group

In joining a group, one accepts a personal responsibility to behave with re-

spect, good will, and honesty. Each one is expected to recognize that the

group's needs have a certain priority over the desires of the individual. Many

people participate in group work in a very egocentric way. It is important

to accept the shared responsibility for helping to _nd solutions to other's

concerns.

Active Participation

We all have an inalienable right to express our own best thoughts. We decide

for ourselves what is right and wrong. Since consensus is a process of syn-

thesis, not competition, all sincere comments are important and valuable. If

ideas are put forth as the speaker's property and individuals are strongly at-

tached to their opinions, consensus will be extremely di_cult. Stubbornness,

closed-mindedness, and possessiveness lead to defensive and argumentative

behavior that disrupts the process. For active participation to occur, it is

necessary to promote trust by creating an atmosphere in which every contri-

bution is considered valuable. With encouragement, each person can develop

3.2. IMPEDIMENTS TO CONSENSUS 25

knowledge and experience, a sense of responsibility and competency, and the

ability to participate.

Equal Access to Power

Because of personal di_erences (experience, assertiveness, social condition-

ing, access to information, etc.) and political disparities, some people in-

evitably have more e_ective power than others. To balance this inequity,

everyone needs to consciously attempt to creatively share power, skills, and

information. Avoid hierarchical structures that allow some individuals to

assume undemocratic power over others. Egalitarian and accountable struc-

tures promote universal access to power.

Patience

Consensus cannot be rushed. Often, it functions smoothly, producing ef-

fective, stable results. Sometimes, when di_cult situations arise, consensus

requires more time to allow for the creative interplay of ideas. During these

times, patience is more advantageous than tense, urgent, or aggressive be-

havior. Consensus is possible as long as each individual acts patiently and

respectfully.

3.2 Impediments To Consensus

Lack of Training

It is necessary to train people in the theory and practice of consensus. Until

consensus is a common form of decisionmaking in our society, new members

will need some way of learning about the process. It is important to o_er

regular opportunities for training. If learning about Formal Consensus is not

made easily accessible, it will limit full participation and create inequities

which undermine this process. Also, training provides opportunities for peo-

ple to improve their skills, particularly facilitation skills, in a setting where

experimentation and role-plays can occur.

26 CHAPTER 3. ON CONFLICT & CONSENSUS

External Hierarchical Structures

It can be di_cult for a group to reach consensus internally when it is part

of a larger group which does not recognize or participate in the consensus

process. It can be extremely frustrating if those external to the group can

disrupt the decisionmaking by interfering with the process by pulling rank.

Therefore, it is desirable for individuals and groups to recognize that they

can be autonomous in relation to external power if they are willing to take

responsibility for their actions.

Social Prejudice

Everyone has been exposed to biases, assumptions, and prejudices which in-

terfere with the spirit of cooperation and equal participation. All people are

inuenced by these attitudes, even though they may deplore them. People

are not generally encouraged to confront these prejudices in themselves or

others. Members of a group often reect social biases without realizing or

attempting to confront and change them. If the group views a prejudicial

attitude as just one individual's problem, then the group will not address

the underlying social attitudes which create such problems. It is appropriate

to expose, confront, acknowledge, and attempt to resolve socially prejudicial

attitudes, but only in the spirit of mutual respect and trust. Members are re-

sponsible for acknowledging when their attitudes are inuenced by disruptive

social training and for changing them. When a supportive atmosphere for

recognizing and changing undesirable attitudes exists, the group as a whole

bene_ts.

Chapter 4

The Art of Evaluation

Meetings can often be a time when some people experience feelings of frus-

tration or confusion. There is always room for improvement in the structure

of the process and/or in the dynamics of the group. Often, there is no time

to talk directly about group interaction during the meeting. Reserve time

at the end of the meeting to allow some of these issues and feelings to be

expressed.

Evaluation is very useful when using consensus. It is worth the time.

Evaluations need not take long, _ve to ten minutes is often enough. It is not

a discussion, nor is it an opportunity to comment on each other's statements.

Do not reopen discussion on an agenda item. Evaluation is a special time to

listen to each other and learn about each other. Think about how the group

interacts and how to improve the process.

Be sure to include the evaluation comments in the notes of the meeting.

This is important for two reasons. Over time, if the same evaluation com-

ments are made again and again, this is an indication that the issue behind

the comments needs to be addressed. This can be accomplished by placing

this issue on the agenda for the next meeting. Also, when looking back at

notes from meetings long ago, evaluation comments can often reveal a great

deal about what actually happened, beyond what decisions were made and

reports given. They give a glimpse into complex interpersonal dynamics.

27

28 CHAPTER 4. THE ART OF EVALUATION

4.1 Purpose of evaluation

Evaluation provides a forum to address procedural aws, inappropriate be-

havior, facilitation problems, logistical di_culties, overall tone, etc. Evalua-

tion is not a time to reopen discussion, make decisions or attempt to resolve

problems, but rather, to make statements, express feelings, highlight prob-

lems, and suggest solutions in a spirit of cooperation and trust. To help

foster communication, it is better if each criticism is coupled with a speci_c

suggestion for improvement. Also, always speak for oneself. Do not attempt

to represent anyone else.

Encourage everyone who participated in the meeting to take part in the

evaluation. Make comments on what worked and what did not. Expect

di_ering opinions. It is generally not useful to repeat other's comments.

Evaluations prepare the group for better future meetings. When the process

works well, or the group responds supportively in a di_cult situation, or

the facilitator does an especially good job, note it, and appreciate work well

done.

Do not attempt to force evaluation. This will cause super_cial or irrel-

evant comments. On the other hand, do not allow evaluations to run on.

Be sure to take each comment seriously and make an attempt, at a later

time, to resolve or implement them. Individuals who feel their suggestions

are ignored or disrespected will lose trust and interest in the group.

For gatherings, conferences, conventions or large meetings, the group

might consider having short evaluations after each section, in addition to

the one at the end of the event. Distinct aspects on which the group might

focus include: the process itself, a speci_c role, a particular technique, fears

and feelings, group dynamics, etc.

At large meetings, written evaluations provide a means for everyone to

respond and record comments and suggestions which might otherwise be lost.

Some people feel more comfortable writing their evaluations rather than say-

ing them. Plan the questions well, stressing what was learned, what was

valuable, and what could have been better and how. An evaluation commit-

tee allows an opportunity for the presenters, facilitators, and/or coordinators

to get together after the meeting to review evaluation comments, consider

suggestions for improvement, and possibly prepare an evaluation report.

Review and evaluation bring a sense of completion to the meeting. A

good evaluation will pull the experience together, remind everyone of the

group's unity of purpose, and provide an opportunity for closing comments.

4.2. USES OF EVALUATION 29

4.2 Uses of evaluation

There are at least ten ways in which evaluation helps improve meetings.

Evaluations:

_ Improve the process by analysis of what happened, why it happened, and

how it might be improved

_ Examine how certain attitudes and statements might have caused various

problems and encourage special care to prevent them from recurring

_ Foster a greater understanding of group dynamics and encourage a method

of group learning or learning from each other

_ Allow the free expression of feelings

_ Expose unconscious behavior or attitudes which interfere with the process

_ Encourage the sharing of observations and acknowledge associations with

society

_ Check the usefulness and e_ectiveness of techniques and procedures

_ Acknowledge good work and give appreciation to each other

_ Reect on the goals set for the meeting and whether they were attained

_ Examine various roles, suggest ways to improve them, and create new

ones as needed

_ Provide an overall sense of completion and closure to the meeting

4.3 Types of evaluation questions

It is necessary to be aware of the way in which questions are asked during

evaluation. The speci_c wording can control the scope and focus of consider-

ation and a_ect the level of participation. It can cause responses which focus

on what was good and bad, or right and wrong, rather than on what worked

and what needed improvement. Focus on learning and growing. Avoid blam-

ing. Encourage diverse opinions.

Some sample questions for an evaluation:

_ Were members uninterested or bored with the agenda, reports, or discus-

sion?

_ Did members withdraw or feel isolated?

_ Is attendance low? If so, why?

_ Are people arriving late or leaving early? If so, why?

30 CHAPTER 4. THE ART OF EVALUATION

_ How was the overall tone or atmosphere?

_ Was there an appropriate use of resources?

_ Were the logistics (such as date, time, or location) acceptable?

_ What was the most important experience of the event?

_ What was the least important experience of the event?

_ What was the high point? What was the low point?

_ What did you learn?

_ What expectations did you have at the beginning and to what degree

were they met? How did they change?

_ What goals did you have and to what degree were they accomplished?

_ What worked well? Why?

_ What did not work so well? How could it have been improved?

_ What else would you suggest be changed or improved, and how?

_ What was overlooked or left out?

Chapter 5

Roles

A role is a function of process, not content. Roles are used during a meeting

according to the needs of the situation. Not all roles are useful at every

meeting, nor does each role have to be _lled by a separate person. Formal

Consensus functions more smoothly if the person _lling a role has some ex-

perience, therefore it is desirable to rotate roles. Furthermore, one who has

experienced a role is more likely to be supportive of whomever currently has

that role. Experience in each role also encourages con_dence and participa-

tion. It is best, therefore, for the group to encourage everyone to experience

each role.

5.1 Agenda Planners

A well planned agenda is an important tool for a smooth meeting, although

it does not guarantee it. Experience has shown that there is a de_nite im-

provement in the ow and pace of a meeting if several people get together

prior to the start of the meeting and propose an agenda. In smaller groups,

the facilitator often proposes an agenda. The agenda planning committee

has six tasks:

_ collect agenda items

_ arrange them

_ assign presenters

_ brainstorm discussion techniques

_ assign time limits

_ write up the proposed agenda

31

32 CHAPTER 5. ROLES

There are at least four sources of agenda items:

_ suggestions from members

_ reports or proposals from committees

_ business from the last meeting

_ standard agenda items, including:

{ opening

{ agenda review

{ review notes

{ break

{ announcements

{ decision review

{ evaluation

Once all the agenda items have been collected, they are listed in an order

which seems e_cient and appropriate. Planners need to be cautious that

items at the top of the agenda tend to use more than their share of time,

thereby limiting the time available for the rest. Each group has di_erent

needs. Some groups work best taking care of business _rst, then address-

ing the di_cult items. Other groups might _nd it useful to take on the

most di_cult work _rst and strictly limit the time or let it take all it needs.

The following are recommendations for keeping the focus of attention on the

agenda:

_ alternate long and short, heavy and light items

_ place reports before their related proposals

_ consider placing items which might generate a sense of accomplishment

early in the meeting

_ alternate presenters

_ be exible

Usually, each item already has a presenter. If not, assign one. Generally,

it is not wise for facilitators to present reports or proposals. However, it is

convenient for facilitators to present some of the standard agenda items.

For complex or especially controversial items, the agenda planners could

suggest various options for group discussion techniques. This may be helpful

to the facilitator.

Next, assign time limits for each item. It is important to be realistic,

being careful to give each item enough time to be fully addressed without

being unfair to other items. Generally, it is not desirable to propose an

agenda which exceeds the desired overall meeting time limit.

5.1. AGENDA PLANNERS 33

The last task is the writing of the proposed agenda so all can see it and

refer to it during the meeting. Each item is listed in order, along with its

presenter and time limit.

The following agenda is an example of how an agenda is structured and

what information is included in it. It shows the standard agenda items, the

presenters, the time limits and the order in which they will be considered. It

also shows one way in which reports and proposals can be presented, but each

group can structure this part of the meeting in whatever way suits its needs.

This model does not show the choices of techniques for group discussion

which the agenda planners might have considered.

34 CHAPTER 5. ROLES

Figure 5.1: Standard Agenda

Agenda Item Presenter Time

OPENING Facilitator 3 min

AGENDA REVIEW Facilitator 5 min

REVIEW NOTES Notetaker 5 min

REPORTS: 15 min

Previous activities

Standing committees

PROPOSALS: 15 min

Discussion (indicate Level and technique)

break 10 min

REPORTS: 10 min

Informational

PROPOSALS 30 min

Discussion (indicate Level and technique)

ANNOUNCEMENTS 5 min

Pass hat

Next meeting

REVIEW DECISIONS Notetaker 5 min

EVALUATION 10 min

CLOSING Facilitator 2 min

TOTAL 2 hours1

1: Includes _ve minutes of \facilitator ex time."

5.2. FACILITATOR 35

5.2 Facilitator

The word facilitate means to make easy. A facilitator conducts group busi-

ness and guides the Formal Consensus process so that it ows smoothly.

Rotating facilitation from meeting to meeting shares important skills among

the members. If everyone has _rsthand knowledge about facilitation, it will

help the ow of all meetings. Co-facilitation, or having two (or more)people

facilitate a meeting, is recommended. Having a woman and a man share the

responsibilities encourages a more balanced meeting. Also, an inexperienced

facilitator may apprentice with a more experienced one. Try to use a variety

of techniques throughout the meeting. And remember, a little bit of humor

can go a long way in easing tension during a long, di_cult meeting.

Good facilitation is based upon the following principles:

Non-directive Leadership

Facilitators accept responsibility for moving through the agenda in the allot-

ted time, guiding the process, and suggesting alternate or additional tech-

niques. In this sense, they do lead the group. They do not give their personal

opinions nor do they attempt to direct the content of the discussion. If they

want to participate, they must clearly relinquish the role and speak as an in-

dividual. During a meeting, individuals are responsible for expressing their

own concerns and thoughts. Facilitators, on the other hand, are responsi-

ble for addressing the needs of the group. They need to be aware of the

group dynamics and constantly evaluate whether the discussion is owing

well. There may be a need for a change in the discussion technique. They

need to be diligent about the fair distribution of attention, being sure to limit

those who are speaking often and o_ering opportunities to those who are not

speaking much or at all. It follows that one person cannot simultaneously

give attention to the needs of the group and think about a personal response

to a given situation. Also, it is not appropriate for the facilitator to support

a particular point of view or dominate the discussion. This does not build

trust, especially in those who do not agree with the facilitator.

Clarity of Process

The facilitator is responsible for leading the meeting openly so that everyone

present is aware of the process and how to participate. This means it is

36 CHAPTER 5. ROLES

important to constantly review what just happened, what is about to happen,

and how it will happen. Every time a new discussion technique is introduced,

explain how it will work and what is to be accomplished. This is both

educational and helps new members participate more fully.

Agenda Contract

The facilitator is responsible for honoring the agenda contract. The facilitator

keeps the questions and discussion focused on the agenda item. Be gentle,

but _rm, because fairness dictates that each agenda item gets only the time

allotted. The agenda contract is made when the agenda is reviewed and

accepted. This agreement includes the items on the agenda, the order in

which they are considered, and the time allotted to each. Unless the whole

group agrees to change the agenda, the facilitator is obligated to keep the

contract. The decision to change the agenda must be a consensus, with little

or no discussion.

At the beginning of the meeting, the agenda is presented to the whole

group and reviewed, item by item. Any member can add an item if it has been

omitted. While every agenda suggestion must be included in the agenda, it

does not necessarily get as much time as the presenter wants. Time ought

to be divided fairly, with individuals recognizing the fairness of old items

generally getting more time than new items and urgent items getting more

time than items which can wait until the next meeting, etc. Also, review

the suggested presenters and time limits. If anything seems inappropriate or

unreasonable, adjustments may be made. Once the whole agenda has been

reviewed and consented to, the agenda becomes a contract. The facilitator

is obligated to follow the order and time limits. This encourages members to

be on time to meetings.

Good Will

Always try to assume good will. Assume every statement and action is sin-

cerely intended to bene_t the group. Assume that each member understands

the group's purpose and accepts the agenda as a contract.

Often, when we project our feelings and expectations onto others, we

inuence their actions. If we treat others as though they are trying to get

attention, disrupt meetings, or pick _ghts, they will often ful_ll our expec-

tations. A resolution to conict is more likely to occur if we act as though

5.3. PEACEKEEPER 37

there will be one. This is especially true if someone is intentionally trying

to cause trouble or who is emotionally unhealthy. Do not attack the person,

but rather, assume good will and ask the person to explain to the group how

that person's statements or actions are in the best interest of the group. It

is also helpful to remember to separate the actor from the action. While

the behavior may be unacceptable, the person is not bad. Avoid accusing the

person of being the way they behave. Remember, no one has the answer. The

group's work is the search for the best and most creative process, one which

fosters a mutually satisfying resolution to any concern which may arise.

5.3 Peacekeeper

The role of peacekeeper is most useful in large groups or when very touchy,

controversial topics are being discussed. A person who is willing to remain

somewhat aloof and is not personally invested in the content of the discussion

would be a good candidate for peacekeeper. This person is selected without

discussion by all present at the beginning of the meeting. If no one wants

this role, or if no one can be selected without objection, proceed without one,

recognizing that the facilitator's job will most likely be more di_cult.

This task entails paying attention to the overall mood or tone of the

meeting. When tensions increase dramatically and angers are out of control,

the peacekeeper interrupts briey to remind the group of its common goals

and commitment to cooperation. The most common way to accomplish this

is a call for a few moments of silence.

The peacekeeper is the only person with prior permission to interrupt a

speaker or speak without _rst being recognized by the facilitator. Also, it

is important to note that the peacekeeper's comments are always directed

at the whole group, never at one individual or small group within the larger

group. Keep comments short and to the point.

The peacekeeper may always, of course, point out when the group did

something well. People always like to be acknowledged for positive behavior.

5.4 Advocate

Like the peacekeeper, advocates are selected without discussion at the be-

ginning of the meeting. If, because of strong emotions, someone is unable

38 CHAPTER 5. ROLES

to be understood, the advocate is called upon to help. The advocate would

interrupt the meeting, and invite the individual to literally step outside the

meeting for some one-on-one discussion. An upset person can talk to some-

one with whom they feel comfortable. This often helps them make clear what

the concern is and how it relates to the best interest of the group. Assume

the individual is acting in good faith. Assume the concern is in the best

interest of the group. While they are doing this, everyone else might take

a short break, or continue with other agenda items. When they return, the

meeting (after completing the current agenda item) hears from the advocate.

The intent here is the presentation of the concern by the advocate rather

than the upset person so the other group members might hear it without the

emotional charge. This procedure is a last resort, to be used only when emo-

tions are out of control and the person feels unable to successfully express

an idea.

5.5 Timekeeper

The role of timekeeper is very useful in almost all meetings. One is selected

at the beginning of the meeting to assist the facilitator in keeping within

the time limits set in the agenda contract. The skill in keeping time is the

prevention of an unnecessary time pressure which might interfere with the

process. This can be accomplished by keeping everyone aware of the status of

time remaining during the discussion. Be sure to give ample warning toward

the end of the time limit so the group can start to bring the discussion to a

close or decide to rearrange the agenda to allow more time for the current

topic. There is nothing inherently wrong with going over time as long as

everyone consents.

5.6 Public Scribe

The role of public scribe is simply the writing, on paper or blackboard, of

information for the whole group to see. This person primarily assists the

facilitator by taking a task which might otherwise distract the facilitator and

interfere with the overall ow of the meeting. This role is particularly useful

during brainstorms, report backs from small groups, or whenever it would

help the group for all to see written information.

5.7. NOTETAKER 39

5.7 Notetaker

The importance of a written record of the meetings cannot be overstated. The

written record, sometimes called notes or minutes, can help settle disputes

of memory or verify past decisions. Accessible notes allow absent members

to participate in ongoing work. Useful items to include in the notes are:

_ date and attendance

_ agenda

_ brief notes (highlights, statistics...)

{ reports

{ discussion

_ verbatim notes

{ proposals (with revisions)

{ decisions (with concerns listed)

{ announcements

{ next meeting time and place

{ evaluation comments

After each decision is made, it is useful to have the notetaker read the

notes aloud to ensure accuracy. At the end of the meeting, it is also helpful

to have the notetaker present to the group a review of all decisions. In larger

groups, it is often useful to have two notetakers simultaneously, because ev-

eryone, no matter how skilled, hears information and expresses it di_erently.

Notetakers are responsible for making sure the notes are recorded accurately,

and are reproduced and distributed according to the desires of the group (e.g.,

mailed to everyone, handed out at the next meeting, _led, etc.).

5.8 Doorkeeper

Doorkeepers are selected in advance of the meeting and need to arrive early

enough to familiarize themselves with the physical layout of the space and

to receive any last minute instructions from the facilitator. They need to

be prepared to miss the _rst half hour of the meeting. Prior to the start

of the meeting, the doorkeeper welcomes people, distributes any literature

connected to the business of the meeting, and informs them of any pertinent

information (the meeting will start _fteen minutes late, the bathrooms are

not wheelchair accessible, etc.).

40 CHAPTER 5. ROLES

A doorkeeper is useful, especially if people tend to be late. When the

meeting begins, they continue to be available for late comers. They might

briey explain what has happened so far and where the meeting is currently

on the agenda. The doorkeeper might suggest to the late comers that they

refrain from participating in the current agenda item and wait until the next

item before participating. This avoids wasting time, repeating discussion, or

addressing already resolved concerns. Of course, this is not a rigid rule. Use

discretion and be respectful of the group's time.

Experience has shown this role to be far more useful than it might at

_rst appear, so experiment with it and discover if meetings can become more

pleasant and productive because of the friendship and care which is expressed

through the simple act of greeting people as they arrive at the meeting.

Chapter 6

Techniques

6.1 Facilitation Techniques

There are a great many techniques to assist the facilitator in managing the

agenda and group dynamics. The following are just a few of the more com-

mon and frequently used techniques available to the facilitator. Be creative

and adaptive. Di_erent situations require di_erent techniques.With expe-

rience will come an understanding of how they a_ect group dynamics and

when is the best time to use them.

6.1.1 Equalizing Participation

The facilitator is responsible for the fair distribution of attention during meet-

ings. Facilitators call the attention of the group to one speaker at a time.

The grammar school method is the most common technique for choosing the

next speaker. The facilitator recognizes each person in the order in which

hands are raised. Often, inequities occur because the attention is dominated

by an individual or class of individuals. This can occur because of socialized

behavioral problems such as racism, sexism, or the like, or internal dynamics

such as experience, seniority, fear, shyness, disrespect, ignorance of the pro-

cess, etc. Inequities can be corrected in many creative ways. For example,

if men are speaking more often than women, the facilitator can suggest a

pause after each speaker, the women counting to _ve before speaking, the

men counting to ten. In controversial situations, the facilitator can request

that three speakers speak for the proposal, and three speak against it. If the

group would like to avoid having the facilitator select who speaks next, the

41

42 CHAPTER 6. TECHNIQUES

group can self-select by asking the last speaker to pass an object, a talking

stick, to the next. Even more challenging, have each speaker stand before

speaking, and begin when there is only one person standing. These are only a

handful of the many possible problems and solutions that exist. Be creative.

Invent your own.

6.1.2 Listing

To help the discussion ow more smoothly, those who want to speak can

silently signal the facilitator, who would add the person's name to a list of

those wishing to speak, and call on them in that order.

6.1.3 Stacking

If many people want to speak at the same time, it is useful to ask all those

who would like to speak to raise their hands. Have them count o_, and then

have them speak in that order. At the end of the stack, the facilitator might

call for another stack or try another technique.

6.1.4 Pacing

The pace or ow of the meeting is the responsibility of the facilitator. If the

atmosphere starts to become tense, choose techniques which encourage bal-

ance and cooperation. If the meeting is going slowly and people are becoming

restless, suggest a stretch or rearrange the agenda.

6.1.5 Checking the Process

If the ow of the meeting is breaking down or if one person or small group

seems to be dominating, anyone can call into question the technique being

used and suggest an alternative.

6.1.6 Silence

If the pace is too fast, if energies and tensions are high, if people are speaking

out of turn or interrupting one another, it is appropriate for anyone to suggest

a moment of silence to calm and refocus energy.

6.1. FACILITATION TECHNIQUES 43

6.1.7 Taking a Break

In the heat of discussion, people are usually resistant to interrupting the ow

to take a break, but a wise facilitator knows, more often than not, that a _ve

minute break will save a frustrating half hour or more of circular discussion

and fruitless debate.

6.1.8 Call For Consensus

The facilitator, or any member recognized to speak by the facilitator, can

call for a test for consensus. To do this, the facilitator asks if there are any

unresolved concerns which remain unaddressed. (See section 2.2.)

6.1.9 Summarizing

The facilitator might choose to focus what has been said by summarizing.

The summary might be made by the facilitator, the notetaker, or anyone

else appropriate. This preempts a common problem, in which the discussion

becomes circular, and one after another, speakers repeat each other.

6.1.10 Reformulating the Proposal

After a long discussion, it sometimes happens that the proposal becomes

modi_ed without any formal decision. The facilitator needs to recognize

this and take time to reformulate the proposal with the new information,

modi_cations, or deletions. Then the proposal is presented to the group so

that everyone can be clear about what is being considered. Again, this might

be done by the facilitator, the notetaker, or anyone else.

6.1.11 Stepping out of Role

If the facilitator wants to become involved in the discussion or has strong

feelings about a particular agenda item, the facilitator can step out of the

role and participate in the discussion, allowing another member to facilitate

during that time.

44 CHAPTER 6. TECHNIQUES

6.1.12 Passing the Clipboard

Sometimes information needs to be collected during the meeting. To save

time, circulate a clipboard to collect this information. Once collected, it

can be entered into the written record and/or presented to the group by the

facilitator.

6.1.13 Polling (Straw Polls)

The usefulness of polling within consensus is primarily clari_cation of the rel-

ative importance of several issues. It is an especially useful technique when

the facilitator is confused or uncertain about the status of a proposal and

wants some clarity to be able to suggest what might be the next process tech-

nique. Polls are not decisions, they are non-binding referenda. All too often,

straw polls are used when the issues are completely clear and the majority

wants to intimidate the minority into submission by showing overwhelming

support rather than to discuss the issues and resolve the concerns. Clear and

simple questions are best. Polls that involve three or more choices can be

especially manipulative. Use with discretion.

6.1.14 Censoring

(This technique and the next are somewhat di_erent from the others. They

may not be appropriate for some groups.) If someone speaks out of turn

consistently, the facilitator warns the individual at least twice that if the

interruptions do not stop, the facilitator will declare that person censored.

This means the person will not be permitted to speak for the rest of this

agenda item. If the interrupting behavior has been exhibited over several

agenda items, then the censoring could be for a longer period of time. This

technique is meant to be used at the discretion of the facilitator. If the

facilitator censors someone and others in the meeting voice disapproval, it

is better for the facilitator to step down from the role and let someone else

facilitate, rather than get into a discussion about the ability and judgment

of the facilitator. The rationale is the disruptive behavior makes facilitation

very di_cult, is disrespectful and, since it is assumed that everyone observed

the behavior, the voicing of disapproval about a censoring indicates lack of

con_dence in the facilitation rather than support for the disruptive behavior.

6.2. GROUP DISCUSSION TECHNIQUES 45

6.1.15 Expulsion

If an individual still acts very disruptively, the facilitator may confront the

behavior. Ask the person to explain the reasons for this behavior, how it is

in the best interest of the group, how it relates to the group's purpose, and

how it is in keeping with the goals and principles. If the person is unable

to answer these questions or if the answers indicate disagreement with the

common purpose, then the facilitator can ask the individual to withdraw

from the meeting.

6.2 Group Discussion Techniques

It is often assumed that the best form of group discussion is that which

has one person at a time speak to the whole group. This is true for some

discussions. But, sometimes, other techniques of group discussion can be

more productive and e_cient than whole group discussion. The following are

some of the more common and frequently used techniques. These could be

suggested by anyone at the meeting. Therefore, it is a good idea if everyone

is familiar with these techniques. Again, be creative and adaptive. Di_erent

situations require di_erent techniques. Only experience reveals how each one

a_ects group dynamics or the best time to use it.

6.2.1 Identi_cation

It is good to address each other by name. One way to learn names is to draw

a seating plan, and as people go around and introduce themselves, write their

names on it. Later, refer to the plan and address people by their names. In

large groups, name tags can be helpful. Also, when people speak, it is useful

for them to identify themselves so all can gradually learn each others' names.

6.2.2 Whole Group

The value of whole group discussion is the evolution of a group idea. A group

idea is not simply the sum of individual ideas, but the result of the interac-

tion of ideas during discussion. Whole group discussion can be unstructured

and productive. It can also be very structured, using various facilitation

techniques to focus it. Often, whole group discussion does not produce max-

imum participation or a diversity of ideas. During whole group discussion,

46 CHAPTER 6. TECHNIQUES

fewer people get to speak, and, at times, the attitude of the group can be

dominated by an idea, a mood, or a handful of people.

6.2.3 Small Group

Breaking into smaller groups can be very useful. These small groups can be

dyads or triads or even larger. They can be selected randomly or self-selected.

If used well, in a relatively short amount of time all participants have the

opportunity to share their own point of view. Be sure to set clear time limits

and select a notetaker for each group. When the larger group reconvenes, the

notetakers relate the major points and concerns of their group. Sometimes,

notetakers can be requested to add only new ideas or concerns and not repeat

something already covered in another report. It is also helpful for the scribe

to write these reports so all can see the cumulative result and be sure every

idea and concern gets on the list.

6.2.4 Brainstorming

This is a very useful technique when ideas need to be solicited from the whole

group. The normal rule of waiting to speak until the facilitator recognizes

you is suspended and everyone is encouraged to call out ideas to be written

by the scribe for all to see. It is helpful if the atmosphere created is one in

which all ideas, no matter how unusual or incomplete, are appropriate and

welcomed. This is a situation in which suggestions can be used as catalysts,

with ideas building one upon the next, generating very creative possibilities.

Avoid evaluating each other's ideas during this time.

6.2.5 Go-rounds

This is a simple technique that encourages participation. The facilitator

states a question and then goes around the room inviting everyone to answer

briey. This is not an open discussion. This is an opportunity to individually

respond to speci_c questions, not to comment on each other's responses or

make unrelated remarks.

6.2. GROUP DISCUSSION TECHNIQUES 47

6.2.6 Fishbowl

The _shbowl is a special form of small group discussion. Several members

representing di_ering points of view meet in an inner circle to discuss the

issue while everyone else forms an outer circle and listens. At the end of a

predetermined time, the whole group reconvenes and evaluates the _shbowl

discussion. An interesting variation: _rst, put all the men in the _shbowl,

then all the women, and they discuss the same topics.

6.2.7 Active Listening

If the group is having a hard time understanding a point of view, someone

might help by active listening. Listen to the speaker, then repeat back what

was heard and ask the speaker if this accurately reects what was meant.

6.2.8 Caucusing

A caucus might be useful to help a multifaceted conict become clearer by

unifying similar perspectives or de_ning speci_c points of departure without

the focus of the whole group. It might be that only some people attend a

caucus, or it might be that all are expected to participate in a caucus. The

di_erence between caucuses and small groups is that caucuses are composed

of people with similar viewpoints, whereas small group discussions are more

useful if they are made up of people with diverse viewpoints or even a random

selection of people.

Part II

Four Founding Documents

49

Generic Versions of Four

Founding Documents

The following four documents are designed to be templates to modify as

desired.

The _rst one, the Generic Vision Statement, is a pithy statement

of the group's purpose and values. Ideally, this statement will change only

slightly over time. Therefore, the statement should, by design, be broad and

general.

The second, Generic Principles, is related to the _rst in that in this

document, each idea in the Vision Statement is de_ned and described at

length and in great detail. It is not broad and general; it is the de_nition

of the speci_c principles and purposes adopted by the group's consent. This

document is designed to change frequently; theoretically, with every decision.

It is where decisions made by the group are accumulated according to the

purpose or value it re_nes.

The third, Generic Nonpro_t Bylaws, is the bylaws for nonpro_t or-

ganizations using consensus decisionmaking. In theory, organizations that

use consensus would be horizontally structured. This means there would be

no Board of Directors who legally would have more power and responsibil-

ity than the rest of the membership. A structure that utilizes a Board of

Directors is called an oligarchy. There is a Board of Directors in this tem-

plate because the state requires this structure. Having all members on the

Board of Directors creates a horizontal structure in keeping with the spirit

of consensus.

The fourth, Generic Organizational Structure, is a model of how to

arrange and operate your organization. Transparency is a value in consensus

decisionmaking. Every organization should have a chart or outline that shows

the kinds of meetings, committees and roles it utilizes and a handbook or

51

52

document that explains the function and purpose of each meeting, committee

or role.

Chapter 1

Generic Vision Statements

Common unity is faith in action. We recognize with sovereignty of the indi-

vidual comes personal responsibility for the community. Collectively, we are

committed to open and honest communication. Together, we can create an

environment where conict and di_erences are expressed openly and safely.

Individually, we practice nonviolence. As individuals and as a group, we are

constantly in the process of evolving the ability to resolve conict without

violence.

We are committed to living simply. We do not own people or things. We

have open, non-possessive, honest, egalitarian relationships with consenting

peers. We are all students and teachers. We give unconditional support to

those dependent upon us. We are stewards of the earth and all her relations.

We strive for sustainable systems in all our endeavors.

Within our community, we are creating a social order which is based

upon honesty and trust, nonviolence and self-empowerment, and equality

and democracy. Within the larger society, we are an alternative society with

a vision of encouraging the outbreak of peace. We are not turning away from

the existing society; we are the hope and the future of society.

53

Chapter 2

Generic Principles

The following is a list of words and phrases from the Vision Statement. Each

needs to be de_ned, in two or three paragraphs (or more), by the membership.

This would be a living document, meaning the de_nitions would evolve, over

time, to more accurately reect the intent and consent of the group.

_ Common unity

_ faith in action

_ sovereignty of the individual

_ personal responsibility

_ community

_ Collective

_ committed

_ open and honest communication

_ create an open and safe environment

_ conict

_ nonviolence

_ the ability to resolve conict without violence

_ living simply

_ non-possessive

_ honest

_ egalitarian

_ relationships with consenting peers

_ all students and teachers

_ unconditional support to those dependent upon us

_ stewards of the earth and all her relations

55

56 CHAPTER 2. PRINCIPLES

_ sustainable systems

_ social order based upon honesty and trust, nonviolence and self-empowerment,

and equality and democracy

_ an alternative society

_ vision

_ outbreak of peace

_ the hope and the future of society

Chapter 3

Generic Nonpro_t Bylaws

Bylaws of Community X, Inc.

Article 1 (Name and Location) Our o_cial name is COMMUNITY X,

INCORPORATED, (hereinafter Community X), and the location of our

principal o_ce is Suite 123, 456 Forest Avenue, Anywhere, USA.

Article 2 (Purpose)

2.1 (Charitable, Humane Organization) Community X is organized

exclusively for charitable purposes:

1. (First charitable purpose)

2. (Second charitable purpose)

3. (Third charitable purpose)

2.2 (Exclusively Nonpro_t, Tax-exempt Activities) Notwithstanding

any other provision of these articles, the corporation shall not carry on any

other activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation exempt

from federal income tax under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue

Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code, or (b) by a

corporation, contributions to which are deductible under section 170 (c) (2)

of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal

tax code.

Article 3 (Fiscal Year) The _scal year of the corporation shall run from

January 1 until December 31.

57

58 CHAPTER 3. BYLAWS

Article 4 (Board of Directors)

4.1 (Number) The Board of Directors shall consist of all members in good

standing.

4.2 (Tenure, Renewal Terms, and Removal) A director's tenure be-

gins at the Board meeting immediately following the certi_cation by the Mem-

bership Committee that this person has successfully ful_lled the requirements

of membership. Every other annual meeting, each and every director's tenure

is renewed by consent of those present. In order to terminate a director's

tenure for cause, a proposal to terminate said tenure must be made by an-

other director at an annual or regular Board meeting. The director whose

tenure may be terminated must be given reasonable notice and an opportu-

nity to be heard at the meeting considering her or his termination. Provided a

quorum is present, a consensus in favor of the director's removal shall cause

said director's tenure to be terminated. The director whose tenure may be

terminated does not participate in the call for consensus on the issue of her

or his termination.

4.3 (Powers of the Board) The a_airs of the corporation shall be man-

aged by the directors who shall have and may exercise all the powers of the

corporation, including but not limited to: a) approving all proposals and appli-

cations for funding; b) entering into agreements and contracts consistent with

the purposes of the corporation; c) hiring the sta_; d) electing the Chairperson

President, Treasurer, and Clerk of the corporation at the annual directors'

meeting.

4.4 (Annual Meeting and regular Board Meeting) There shall be an

annual meeting of directors on the third Sunday in August, where the o_cers

of the corporation for the upcoming _scal year shall be elected and all regular

business and policy making shall occur. Additional regular Board meetings

or committee meetings may be held as needed.

4.5 (Special Board Meetings) Special Board meetings may be called at

any time by consent of ten percent (10%) of current directors in good stand-

ing.

4.6 (Notice) Reasonable notice to all directors must be given for all meet-

ings. Two week's notice via e-mail, letter, or phone, shall be considered

reasonable notice. In the case of a \special" meeting called in an emergency,

forty-eight hours notice shall be considered reasonable.

59

4.7 (Quorum) At any directors meeting, the attendance of at least ten

percent (10%) of the directors in good standing shall constitute a quorum.

4.8 (Action by Formal Consensus) When a quorum is present at any

meeting, a consensus, using Formal Consensus (as de_ned in On Conict

and Consensus by C.T. Lawrence Butler and Amy Rothstein) shall decide

any question.

4.9 (Compensation) The Board may from time to time determine in

good faith, to compensate directors for their services, which may include

expenses of attendance at meetings. Directors shall not be precluded form

serving the corporation in any other capacity and receiving compensation for

any such services.

4.10 (Committees) The directors, by consent, may elect or appoint one

or more committees and may delegate to any such committee or committees

any or all of their powers. The committee shall remain operative as long as

it is deemed necessary by the directors.

60 CHAPTER 3. BYLAWS

Article 5 (O_cers of the Corporation)

5.1 (Election) The president, treasurer, and clerk of the corporation shall

be elected by the directors at the annual meeting of the directors. Only mem-

bers in good standing may be elected o_cers. Further, the clerk shall be a

resident of the state of incorporation. In addition, the directors may elect

a convener, one or more facilitators and such assistant clerks and assistant

treasurers as it may deem proper. No more than one o_ce may be held by

the same person.

5.2 (Tenure) O_cers' terms are for one year, and until the succeeding

o_cer is chosen and quali_ed.

5.3 (Renewal Terms) Any or all of the o_cers may be elected for re-

newal terms by the consent of the directors.

5.4 (Removal of O_cers) Any o_cers' tenure may be terminated for

cause by consent of the directors provided reasonable notice is given and the

o_cer has an opportunity to speak at the directors meeting where her or his

termination is being considered.

5.5 (Facilitator of the Board) The facilitator shall preside at all direc-

tors meetings, and shall have and perform such duties as may be assigned to

her or him by the directors.

5.6 (President of the Corporation) The president shall be the chief

executive o_cer of the corporation and, subject to the control of the directors,

shall have general charge and supervision of the a_airs of the corporation,

including but not limited to being signatory of the corporate checking account.

5.7 (Treasurer) The treasurer shall be the chief _nancial o_cer and the

chief accounting o_cer of the corporation, who shall be in charge of its _-

nancial a_airs, and keep accurate records thereof. The treasurer may have

such other duties and powers as designated by the directors, including but not

limited to being signatory of the corporate checking account.

5.8 (Clerk) The clerk shall keep and maintain corporation _les, including

archives of the directors meetings notes, which shall be kept at the corpora-

tion's principle o_ce in the state where the corporation is incorporated. Such

records shall also include corporate articles of organization, bylaws, and the

names and addresses of current directors.

61

5.9 (Other O_cers and Agents) The directors may appoint such of-

_cers and agents as it may deem advisable, who shall hold their o_ces for

such terms and shall exercise such power and perform such duties as shall be

determined by the directors.

5.10 (Resignation) An o_cer may resign at any time for health or per-

sonal reasons.

5.11 (Vacancies) If the o_ce of any o_cer becomes vacant, the directors

may elect a successor, who shall serve until the next annual meeting at which

point he or she could be elected to another term, or a di_erent o_cer elected.

Article 6 (Execution of Papers)

6.1 (Instruments) All deeds, leases, transfers, contracts, bonds, notes,

checks, drafts, and other obligations made, accepted or endorsed by the cor-

poration must be signed by the president or the treasurer. Any recordable

instrument purporting to a_ect an interest in real estate, executed in the

name of the corporation by two of its o_cers, of whom one is the president

and the other is the treasurer, shall be binding of the corporation in favor

of a purchaser or other person relying in good faith upon such instrument

notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions of the articles of organization,

bylaws, resolutions, or decisions of the corporation.

Article 7 (Personal Liability)

The directors and o_cers of the corporation shall not be personally liable

for any debt, liability, or obligation of the corporation. All persons, corpora-

tions, or other entities extending credit to, contracting with, or having any

claim against, the corporation, may look only to the funds and property of

the corporation for the payment of any such contract or claim or for the pay-

ment of any debt, damages, judgment or decree, or of any money that may

otherwise become due or payable to them from the corporation.

Article 8 (Disbursement of Earnings and Assets)

8.1 (Net Earnings) No part of the net earnings of the corporation shall

inure to the bene_t of, or be distributable to its members, o_cers, or other

private persons, except that the corporation shall be empowered and authorized

to pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and to make payments

and distributions in furtherance of the purposes set forth in Article 2 hereof.

62 CHAPTER 3. BYLAWS

8.2 (Dissolution) Upon the dissolution of the corporation, assets shall be

distributed for one or more exempt purposes within the meaning of section 501

(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future

federal tax code, or in the manner prescribed by State Law Code, chapter 123,

section 456, or corresponding chapter of any future state statue.

Article 9 (Amendments)

These bylaws may be altered, amended, or repealed in whole or in part by

consent of the directors at two consecutive annual directors meetings.

63

Article 10 (Application of State Law Code c.123)

To the extent that any provision of these bylaws is inconsistent with State

Law Code c.123, it is the intent of these bylaws that c.123 shall supersede

these bylaws and apply. To the extent that these bylaws do not make provision

for any corporate action, and c.123 does make such provision, c.123 shall

apply.

Chapter 4

Generic Organizational

Structure

Preface

The following structure proposal is designed for an organization of 100 people

or more.

Each member of the organization would belong to an a_nity group of

between 5 and 20 adults. Each a_nity group would be autonomous, having

complete authority to decide who is in the a_nity group, how the a_nity

group is organized internally, and to what degree the a_nity group directly

participates in the organization.

A_nity groups can be created by a group of new members, a split or spin

o_ from an existing a_nity group, or individuals drawn from other a_nity

groups into a new a_nity group. The relationships between members of

an a_nity group are created by the people involved. In this organization,

behaviors are expected to be nonviolent, respectful, and egalitarian.

This organization of a_nity groups accepts and promotes diverse and

possibly challenging types of a_nity groups. No a_nity group will be denied

participation in the organization because of sexual orientation, ethnic or

cultural background, age, physical or mental di_erence.

This structure outline is based upon two other documents, the Commu-

nity X Vision Statement and the Community X Principles and Values.

If you have questions, please call for Formal Consensus Technical Assis-

tance at 1-800-569-4054.

65

66 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

Organizational structure outline

1. Meetings

(a) A_nity Meetings

(b) Annual Community Meetings

(c) Elders Council

(d) Peace Council

(e) Orientation Meetings

(f) Trainings

(g) Committee Meetings

(h) Special Meetings

2. Committees

(a) Executive

(b) Financial

(c) Membership

(d) Newsletter

(e) Outreach

(f) Fundraising

(g) Community Building

(h) Agenda Planning

(i) Directory

(j) Childcare

(k) Healthcare

(l) A_nity Groups

(m) Mediation

(n) Festival

3. Roles

67

(a) Meeting Speci_c

i. Facilitator

ii. Notetaker

iii. Public Scribe

iv. Timekeeper

v. Greeter

vi. Peacekeeper

vii. Refreshment Coordinator/Housekeeper

(b) Long Term

i. Treasurer

ii. Agenda & Schedule Coordinator

iii. Archivist

iv. Newsletter Editor

Meetings

All meetings of Community X are open to all community members. All meet-

ings are conducted in the spirit of nonviolent conict resolution, with special

attention given to open-mindedness so that diversity of ideas and lifestyles is

valued and supported. This is accomplished by using Formal Consensus deci-

sionmaking which provides for appropriate conict and the ability to \agree

to disagree". All decisions at any meeting must be in harmony with the

Principles and Values and Vision Statement of Community X and consistent

with any previous decisions.

A_nity Meetings

All business, _nancial, and policy implementation decisions are made at

monthly a_nity group business meetings. (This business meeting is in addi-

tion to other kinds of a_nity group get-togethers each month and may be a

part of a longer a_nity group event.) All members of the a_nity group are

expected to attend. Non-members are welcome to observe or give reports

when invited. A quorum is attained when at least two thirds of the current

a_nity group members are present. It is suggested that decisions be made by

consensus using Formal Consensus but each a_nity group can decide what

68 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

process they want to use internally. Notes are taken at every a_nity group

meeting. The notetaker is expected to reproduce and distribute the notes

in a timely fashion, but no later than 10 days before the next meeting. In

addition, a copy of the notes for each a_nity group meeting will be kept on

permanent _le with the community archivist. Access to these notes will be

granted to any Community X member upon request.

Annual Community Meeting

The Community meeting occurs at least once each year, generally in the

summer. All members of the community are invited to attend. Notice of this

meeting will be mailed to all members at least one month in advance of the

meeting. A quorum is at least 10% of the current members. A meeting will

be deemed adjourned if a quorum is lost. All decisions are made by consensus

using Formal Consensus (as de_ned in On Conict and Consensus, including

adaptations de_ned in Formal Consensus at Community X Meetings). The

community meeting is the highest decision making body in Community X.

All major policy decisions which e_ect every a_nity group in Community

X need to be passed by this meeting. Any decision made by another part

of Community X can be reviewed and/or overturned by the members at

a community meeting. Only members can raise concerns. A minimum of

three volunteer members will be appointed to each committee at the annual

community meeting. Notes will be taken at every community meeting and

kept on permanent _le with the archivist. Access to these notes will be

granted to any Community X community member upon request. The cost

for copying and mailing is the responsibility of the member.

Elders Council

Each a_nity group will appoint one member to the Elders Council. (The

suggested qualities are long term involvement with Community X and a

wise, calm, fair-minded personality.) Elders Council will meet as necessary,

but at least once a year to elect a convener and review the state of the

community. All decisions are made by consensus using Formal Consensus.

Any elder can request the Elders Council convene. The convener will organize

an Elders Council within one month of such a request. A quorum will be

attained when there is an Elder from at least 75% of the a_nity groups

in the community. The Elders Council is responsible for resolving conicts

69

between a_nity groups, between an a_nity group and another organization

(when possible), and interpret Community X policy decisions. Decisions by

the Elders Council are _nal except they can be reviewed and overturned by

a consensus of the members at a community meeting.

Peace Council

Any member of the Community X may volunteer for the Peace Council. The

Peace Council will meet as necessary, but at least once a year to elect a

convener and develop plans for nonviolence and mediation trainings for the

community. At any time, any member may request a mediation or \Peace

Council" to resolve a conict she or he has been unable to resolve directly

with another member. The member may contact someone who has identi_ed

him or herself as a mediator (or member of the Peace Council) and ask the

mediator to arrange a mediation with the person in conict. If the member

cannot _nd or does not know a mediator, she or he may contact the convener

of the Peace Council, who will assist them in _nding a suitable mediator. In

all situations, participation in a mediation by all parties is voluntary, includ-

ing the mediator. Generally, out of respect for the participants involved, a

mediation is a private matter and should remain that way. If the conict is

unable to be resolved through mediation, the people involved may appeal to

the Elders Council or the community meeting.

Orientation Meetings

The Orientation Meeting takes place as often as needed for the orientation

of new members into Community X. It will include (but is not limited to): a

history of Community X; the decision making structure of Community X; an

introduction to the Formal Consensus decisionmaking process of Community

X; a brief lesson on nonviolence and community; a brief exploration into op-

pression and diversity; and some fun and games. The membership committee

will be responsible for organizing these meetings. These orientations will be

open to all Community X members.

Trainings

There are at least three areas in which all of us need regular training: consen-

sus decisionmaking, nonviolence, and ending oppression. Community X will

70 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

o_er trainings in each of these areas at least once a year. The Membership

Committee will be responsible for organizing these trainings. All Community

X members are encouraged to attend these trainings.

Committee Meetings

There are fourteen standing committees. (See the section on committees for

more details on each of these committees.). In addition, there will be ad hoc

committees, as needed, created by the members, the a_nity groups, or at

community meetings. All members of Community X are expected to be on at

least one committee. A quorum at each committee meeting is at least three

Community X members. Each committee will meet as often as necessary to

conduct its business. Each committee will be responsible for carrying out the

tasks assigned to it and will report back to the sponsoring body on its work.

Any decisions proposed by any committee must be brought to an a_nity

group or community meeting and put on the agenda. No committee has

authority to make decisions in the name of Community X unless explicitly

charged with that responsibility for a particular decision by the Executive

Committee or the community meeting.

Special Meetings

From time to time, the Executive committee might decide to hold a Special

Community Meeting. This meeting may be empowered to make decisions

for Community X if all current members are noti_ed of the meeting agenda,

time, and place, by mail, at least 14 days prior to the meeting. Any a_nity

group, council, or committee may hold special meetings as desired so long as

all current members of that body are noti_ed in a timely fashion.

Committees

There are fourteen standing committees. Ad hoc committees can be convened

as needed by the members, the a_nity groups, or at community meetings.

Membership on any committee is open to all members of the Community

X community. A minimum of three volunteer members will be appointed

to each committee at the annual community meeting. Internal structure

and process for each committee is determined by each committee. Each

71

committee will be responsible for submitting an annual operating budget

(January 1 - December 31) to the Treasurer by the end of September each

year.

Executive

The Executive Committee is composed of the Treasurer, the Agenda & Sched-

ule Coordinator, the current convener of the Elders Council, and two addi-

tional past or present Elders appointed at the annual community meeting.

There are no regularly scheduled meetings of the Executive Committee. It

meets only as needed and can be convened by any one of its members. The

Executive Committee is responsible for oversight and coordination of the

annual community meeting, including appointing the convener of it. It is

charged with ful_lling the decisions made at the community meetings. The

executive committee cannot make policy; however, it can, when necessary,

make decisions in the name of Community X for which there is no existing

policy decision or about which the policy decision is unclear. Any decision

made in this manner is provisional until the next scheduled community meet-

ing, when the decision will be revisited and a consensus must be reached for

the decision to stand.

Financial

The Financial Committee is responsible for general _scal management, in-

cluding oversight of the Treasurer and the annual budget. The Financial

Committee recommends an annual budget to the community meeting for ap-

proval in October for the following calendar year. The _nancial committee

meets as often as needed but at least twice each year; once in early Octo-

ber to create a proposed annual budget, and once immediately following the

annual community meeting (where at least three members volunteer for this

committee for the coming year).

Membership

The Membership Committee is a minimum of three volunteer members ap-

pointed at the annual community meeting. This committee will organize and

facilitate Orientation Meetings. The committee will keep records of atten-

dance at Orientation Meetings. The Membership Committee implements the

72 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

membership policies of Community X. As a minimum, requirements for be-

coming a member are: 1) attend an Orientation Meeting; 2) attend at least

one Community X sponsored event each year; 3) volunteer for at least _ve

hours of service to the Community X community each year (not including vol-

unteer work at Community X events); and, 4) regularly attend the meetings

of at least one committee. [Note: Community X makes available _nancial

assistance for all Community X events so that no one is unable to become

a member because of a _nancial barrier.] The Membership Committee will

consider exemptions for those who have challenges and are unable to ful_ll

these requirements. It will be the Membership Committee's responsibility to

record and maintain up-to-date information on member's volunteer time and

evaluate ful_llment of the membership requirement for each member on an

annual basis.

Newsletter

The Newsletter Committee is responsible for production and distribution of

the newsletter on a regular basis. The editorial policy will be determined by

this committee. [Note: As a minimum editorial policy, no submission will

be accepted for printing which advocates or encourages the use of violence.

Also, an article may be edited so it will _t available space. No changes will

be made to a submission without the author's permission.]

Outreach

The Outreach Committee is responsible for educating the general public

about how to become a member of Community X and encouraging people

to join. The Outreach Committee is responsible for promoting Community

X events. (However, since this must be done with some sensitivity to the

nature of Community X and because no policy or precedent currently exists,

before this committee can begin promoting Community X events, they must

develop and propose guidelines for community approval.)

Fundraising

The task of the Fundraising Committee is the planning and implementation

of activities which raise money for the operating expenses of Community

X. This may include: dues, donations collected at events, direct appeals

73

through the newsletter or the mail, special events, performances, the annual

festival, Community X merchandise sales, and grants. The challenge for this

committee is creating a fundraising component at every Community X event.

Community Building

The Community Building Committee is responsible for developing commu-

nity within Community X. This might include: conducting rituals; organiz-

ing group excursions; creating a community center; establishing a community

land trust; managing a community educational resource library; etc.

Agenda Planning

The Agenda Planning Committee is composed of the Agenda & Schedule Co-

ordinator, the facilitator and convener of community meetings, and any other

member. Together they create a proposed agenda for community meetings.

In addition, they assist the convener in organizing community meetings.

Directory

The Directory Committee compiles and publishes the Community X direc-

tory on an annual basis.

Childcare

The Childcare committee organizes childcare for every Community X event

and is a resource for a_nity groups needing childcare for their activities.

Healthcare

The Healthcare committee provides resources and support for quality alter-

native healthcare opportunities for members of Community X.

A_nity Groups

The A_nity Groups committee assists in organizing new a_nity groups and

matching new members with appropriate a_nity groups.

74 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

Mediation

The mediation committee collects resources and organizes trainings in con-

ict resolution skills and keeps an up-to-date pro_le of all members of Com-

munity X who are willing to mediate.

Festival

The Festival committee is responsible for organizing at least one \open to

the public" festival each year for Community X, usually in the summer and

coinciding with the annual community meeting.

Roles

Any of the following roles may be _lled by a member of Community X.

Meeting Speci_c

These roles are speci_cally for the annual community meetings. A_nity

groups and committee meetings can choose to use similar roles or may de_ne

their own. Roles are _lled by volunteers at the end of each meeting for the

next meeting and published in the notes. If more than one person volunteers

for a role and they cannot decide among themselves who will take the role,

there will be an open vote with the person getting the most votes getting

the role. Everyone is encouraged to _ll any role. To facilitate this, it will

be a general guideline that a role will be o_ered to someone who has not

yet _lled it before it is open to others who have _lled it before; and, that

no one is expected to _ll a role more than once every year. At any time,

a person, especially a new member, may ask for an experienced partner to

assist her/him in ful_lling the role.

Facilitator

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.2.) The facilitator is expected to

meet with the Agenda Planning Committee prior to the community meet-

ing to plan a proposed agenda and brainstorm on discussion techniques for

speci_c agenda items.

75

Notetaker

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.7.) In addition, the Note Taker

records the attendance at community meetings and who _lled which role.

Public Scribe

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.6.)

Timekeeper

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.5.)

Greeter

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.8.)

Peacekeeper

(See On Conict and Consensus, Section 5.3.)

Refreshment Coordinator/Housekeeper

The Refreshment Coordinator provides a meal at each community meeting.

In keeping with tradition, the meal should be vegan (no animal products).

The cost will be paid by Community X. The Housekeeper is responsible for

the physical environment of the meeting space.

Long Term

The long term roles are appointed annually at the community meeting for

the following year. Volunteers must be members and willing to accept the

role for the entire year.

Treasurer

The Treasurer is responsible for managing the Community X money and

checking account, keeping the _nancial records, cutting checks, and assisting

in creating the annual budget. The Treasurer is expected to attend commu-

nity meetings and provide written quarterly _nancial reports to the Executive

76 CHAPTER 4. STRUCTURE

Committee and _led with the Archivist. On occasion, the Treasurer may be

delegated to make a decision about some business or _nancial matter by the

Executive Committee when expedient, necessary, or desirable.

Agenda & Schedule Coordinator (ASC)

The ASC is responsible for keeping a schedule of all Community X functions.

The primary purpose is information sharing to avoid scheduling conicting

events whenever possible. The ASC is expected to attend community meet-

ings. Also, the ASC is expected to meet with the facilitator prior to each

community meeting to create a proposed agenda and brainstorm on discus-

sion techniques for speci_c agenda items. In addition, the ASC is responsible

for keeping track of tabled items which need to be included on the agenda

at the next meeting. Likewise, the ASC is responsible for tracking the eval-

uation comments and noticing if the same or similar issues keep recurring.

When this happens, the ASC might place this issue on the agenda for dis-

cussion or take whatever other appropriate action necessary to address and

resolve the issue.

Archivist

The Archivist is responsible for the archives of Community X. The archives

should include a copy of all documents generated by the community meet-

ings, including the notes from each meeting, and other signi_cant material

important to the life of the organization.

Newsletter Editor

The Newsletter Editor is responsible for publishing and distributing the

Newsletter for the Community X community.

Part III

Essays

77

Chapter 1

Consensus Revisited

The fundamental di_erence between consensus and voting is one of cooper-

ation and competition. This a_ects the structure of the process as well as

the attitude of the participants. Consensus fosters an environment in which

everyone is respected and all contributions are valued. Creative resolution

of all concerns contributes to the overall quality of the decision. Voting en-

courages competition, often without regard to others concerns, since its goal

is the winning of the most votes. Using majority rule risks alienation and

apathy within the group.

Consensus requires a di_erent kind of attitude toward conict and its

resolution. Conict is considered necessary, welcomed, and desirable, not

something to be avoided, repressed, or feared. Its resolution is achieved

through creativity and cooperation. The groups strives to create an environ-

ment in which disagreement can be expressed without fear and heard as a

concern which, when resolved, will make the decision stronger.

This attitude opposes our socialized attitude towards conict. It is chal-

lenging to invite conict into our discussions. Creation of a cooperative, sup-

portive environment will require tolerance and a willingness to experiment.

In the early stages, this might prove to be di_cult; pent-up frustrations and

unexpressed angers based upon concerns that were never before allowed to

be expressed will surface. However, if groups stay with this process, they will

be rewarded with improved group dynamics, more creative resolutions, and

greater trust and respect.

Since the skills and techniques necessary for consensus process are not

readily taught in our society, it is unreasonable to expect any group to be

able to use consensus without _rst taking the time to learn it. It is also

79

80 CHAPTER 1. CONSENSUS REVISITED

important to recognize that not only do new skills, techniques, and language

need to be learned but, in addition, the old habits of competitiveness, defen-

siveness, and possessiveness inherent in parliamentary procedure need to be

\unlearned." Speci_c attention must be given to the fact that almost all of

us have been taught to behave in these ways and this undermines our ability

to use consensus. For this reason, the consensus process known as Formal

Consensus was created.

Formal Consensus employs a clearly de_ned yet exible structure, a rigid

agenda contract, and strong facilitation. Often, groups use consensus without

ever agreeing upon a particular way of using it. Therefore, from week to week

and month to month, the process changes without conscious e_ort. This can

lead to frustration and manipulation. If the process is not clearly de_ned,

access to decision making can be very di_cult for members (especially new

members). In any given meeting, if the agenda is not honored as a rigid

contract, earlier items will get an unfair amount of the meeting time and

later items will be shortened, possibly missed altogether. The same thing

can happen within one agenda item. During discussion, one idea or one

person can dominate the time, not allowing other ideas or all members an

opportunity to be heard. A strong facilitator can recognize this and apply

facilitation techniques that more fairly distribute the attention of the group.

It should be noted that, while the facilitator may be powerful with regard

to process, the facilitator should not be involved with or comment on the

content of any particular agenda item. If this happens, the facilitator should

\step out of the role."

Formal Consensus is e_cient and e_ective. It provides a clearly de_ned

structure so that even the most complicated decision can be made calmly and

timely. But to accomplish this, it also requires training and discipline. For-

mal Consensus is nonviolent, democratic, based upon the group's principles,

better in larger groups, better when everyone participates, not inherently

time-consuming, and cannot be secretly disrupted (that is, the structure of

this process reveals hidden agendas).

[This article _rst appeared in Co-op News Network (May/June 1993).]

Chapter 2

A Revolutionary

Decision-Making Process

If you were asked to pick one thing that might bring about major social,

political, and economic change in this country, what would you pick? Most

people would pick their favorite issue; be it civil rights, demilitarization, en-

vironmental sustainability, or whatever. Some people would choose a system

of values to replace the capitalism system such as socialism or the Ten Key

Values of the Greens. But few people would even think of changing group

dynamics (the way people treat each other when interacting with one another

in a group); or speci_cally, the process they use when making decisions.

Process is the key to revolutionary change. This is not a new message.

Visionaries have long pointed to this but it is a hard lesson to learn. As re-

cently as the 70s, feminists clearly de_ned the lack of an alternative process

for decisionmaking and group interaction as the single most important obsta-

cle in the way of real change, both within progressive organizations and for

society at large. Despite progress on many issues of concern to progressive-

minded people, very little has changed in the way people treat each other,

either locally or globally, and almost nothing has changed about who makes

the decisions. The values of competition, which allow us to accept the idea

that somebody has to lose; the structure of hierarchy, which, by de_nition,

creates power elites; and the techniques of domination and control, which

dehumanizes and alienates all parties a_ected by their use, are the standards

of group interaction with which we were all conditioned. There are but a few

models in our society which o_er an alternative.

81

82 CHAPTER 2. REVOLUTIONARY PROCESS

All groups, no matter what their mission or political philosophy, use

some form of process to accomplish their work. Almost all groups, no matter

where they fall on the social, political, and economic spectrum of society,

have a hierarchical structure, accept competition as \natural", acceptable,

and even desirable, and put a good deal of e_ort into maintaining control of

their members. It is telling that in our society, there are opposing groups,

with very di_erent perspectives and values, which have identical structures

and techniques for interaction and decisionmaking. If you played a theater

game in which both groups wore the same costumes and masks and spoke

in gibberish rather than words, a spectator would not be able to tell them

apart.

So what would an alternative revolutionary decisionmaking process look

like, you ask? To begin with, a fundamental shift from competition to co-

operation. This does not mean to do away with competition. Ask any team

coach what the key to victory is and you will be told \cooperation within the

team". The fundamental shift is the use of competition not to win, which

is just a polite way of saying to dominate, to beat, to destroy, to kill the

opposition; but rather, to use competition to do or be the best. In addition,

the cooperative spirit recognizes that it is not necessary to attack another's

e_orts in order to do your best; in fact, the opposite is true. In most situa-

tions, helping others do their best actually increases your ability to do better.

And in group interactions, the cooperative spirit actually allows the group's

best to be better than the sum of its parts.

Cooperation is more than \live and let live". It is making an e_ort to

understand another's point of view. It is incorporating another's perspective

with your own so that a new perspective emerges. It is suspending disbelief,

even if only temporarily, so you can see the gem of truth in ideas other

than your own. It is a process of creativity, synthesis, and open-mindedness

which leads to trust-building, better communication and understanding, and

ultimately, a stronger, healthier, more successful group.

The next step is the development of an organization which is non-hierarchical

or egalitarian. A corresponding structure would include: participatory democ-

racy, routine universal skill-building and information sharing, rotation of

leadership roles, frequent evaluations, and, perhaps most importantly, equal

access to power. Hierarchical structures are not, in and of themselves, the

problem. But their use concentrates power at the top and, invariably, the top

becomes less and less accessible to the people at the bottom, who are usually

most a_ected by the decisions made by those at the top. Within groups (and

83

within society itself), there becomes a power elite. In an egalitarian struc-

ture, everyone has access to power and every position of power is accountable

to everyone. This does not mean that there are no leaders. But the leaders

actively share skills and information. They recognize that leadership is a role

empowered by the entire group, not a personal characteristic. A group in

which most or all of the members can _ll any of the leadership roles cannot

easily be dominated, internally or externally.

The last and most visible step toward revolutionary change in group pro-

cess is the manner in which members of the group interact with each other.

Dominating attitudes and controlling behavior would not be tolerated. Peo-

ple would show respect and expect to be shown respect. Everyone would

be doing their personal best to help the group reach decisions which are

in the best interest of the group. There would be no posturing and taking

sides. Conicts would be seen as an opportunity for growth, expanding peo-

ple's thinking, sharing new information, and developing new solutions which

include everyone's perspectives. The group would create an environment

where everyone was encouraged to participate, conict was freely expressed,

and resolutions were in the best interest of everyone involved. Indubitably,

this would be revolutionary.

Glossary

agenda contract The agenda contract is made when the agenda is reviewed

and accepted. This agreement includes the items on the agenda, the

order in which they are considered, and the time allotted to each. Un-

less the whole group agrees to change the agenda, the facilitator is

obligated to keep to the contract. The decision to change the agenda

must be a consensus, with little or no discussion.

agreement Complete agreement, with no unresolved concerns.

block If the allotted agenda time has been spent trying to achieve consen-

sus, and unresolved legitimate concerns remain, the proposal may be

considered blocked, or not able to be adopted at this meeting.

concern A point of departure or disagreement with a proposal.

conict The expression of disagreement, which brings into focus diverse

viewpoints, and provides the opportunity to explore their strengths

and weaknesses.

consensus A decisionmaking process whereby decisions are reached when all

members present consent to a proposal. This process does not assume

everyone must be in complete agreement. When di_erences remain

after discussion, individuals can agree to disagree, that is, give their

consent by standing aside, and allow the proposal to be accepted by

the group.

consent Acceptance of the proposal, not necessarily agreement. Individu-

als are responsible for expressing their ideas, concerns and objections.

Silence, in response to a call for consensus, signi_es consent. Silence is

not complete agreement; it is acceptance of the proposal.

85

86 GLOSSARY

decision The end product of an idea that started as a proposal and evolved

to become a plan of action accepted by the whole group.

evaluation A group analysis at the end of a meeting about interpersonal

dynamics during decisionmaking. This is a time to allow feelings to be

expressed, with the goal of improving the functioning of future meet-

ings. It is not a discussion or debate, nor should anyone comment on

another's evaluation.

meeting An occasion in which people come together and, in an orderly way,

make decisions.

methods of decisionmaking

autocracy one person makes the decisions for everyone

oligarchy a few people make the decisions for everyone

representative democracy a few people are

elected to make the decisions for everyone

majority rule democracy the majority makes the decisions for ev-

eryone

consensus everyone makes the decisions for everyone

proposal A written plan that some members of a group present to the whole

group for discussion and acceptance.

stand aside To agree to disagree, to be willing to let a proposal be adopted

despite unresolved concerns.

Bibliography

[1] Peace Education Division American Friends Service Committee. In

Place of War. Grossman, NY, 1967.

[2] Brian Auvine, Michel Avery, Barbara Streibel, and Lonnie Weiss. Build-

ing United Judgment: A Handbook for Consensus Decision Making. The

Center for Conict Resolution, 731 State Street, Madison, WI 53703,

1981.

[3] Brian Auvine, Betsy Densmore, Mary Extrom, Scott Poole, and Michel

Shanklin. a manual for group facilitators. The Center for Conict Res-

olution, 731 State Street, Madison, WI 53703, 1977.

[4] Hugo A. Bedau, editor. Civil Disobedience: Theory and Practice. Pega-

sus Books, New York, NY, 1969.

[5] Karen Brandow, Jim McDonnell, and Vocations for Social Change. No

Bosses Here: a manual on working collectively and cooperatively. Voca-

tions for Social Change, PO Box 211, Essex Station, Boston, MA 02112,

P.O. Box 2783 Boston, MA 02208, second edition, 1981.

[6] Virginia Coover, Ellen Deacon, Charles Esser, and Christopher Moore.

Resource Manual for a Living Revolution: A Handbook of Skills and

Tools for Social Change Activists. 4722 Baltimore Ave., Philadelphia,

PA 19143, 1985.

[7] Dave Dellinger. More Power Than We Know: The Peoples Movement

Toward Democracy. Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden City, NY, 1976.

[8] Barbara Deming. We Cannot Live Without Our Lives. Grossman, New

York, NY, 1974.

87

88 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[9] Mohandas Ghandi. Nonviolent Resistance. Schocken, New York, NY,

1961.

[10] A. Paul Hare and Herbert H. Blumberg. Nonviolent Direct Action. Cor-

pus, Washington, 1968.

[11] Stephanie Judson. A Manual on Nonviolence and Children. Yearly Meet-

ing of the Religious Society of Friends, Peace Committee, Philadelphia,

4722 Baltimore Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19143, 1977.

[12] Berit Lakey. Meeting Facilitation: The No Magic Method. New Society

Publishers, 4722 Baltimore Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19143, 1983.

[13] Staughton Lynd, editor. Nonviolence In America: A Documentary His-

tory. Bobbs-Merrill, NY, 1966.

[14] Gene Sharp. The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Porter Sargent, Boston,

MA, 1973.

[15] Michael J. Sheeran. Beyond Majority Rule. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting

of the Religious Society of Friends, 1515 Cherry Street, Philadelphia, PA

19102, 1983.

[16] John D. Swanson, editor. People With People: A Compendium of Group

Process Theories. Humanitas, PO Box 196, Jamestown, RI 02835, 1977.

[17] War Resisters League, 339 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10012. War

Resisters League Organizers Manual, 1981.

[18] Charlene Eldridge Wheeler and Peggy L. Chinn. Peace & Power. Buf-

falo, NY, 1984. Current edition published by the National League for

Nursing in 2001.

[19] Peter Woodrow. Clearness: Processes for Supporting Individuals &

Groups in Decision-Making. New Society Publishers, 4722 Baltimore

Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19143, 1977, 1984.

Index

active listening, 47

active participation, 24

advocate, 37

agenda, xiv, 8, 12, 17, 18, 27, 29, 31{

36, 38{44, 66, 67, 70, 71, 73,

74, 76, 85

agenda contract, 18, 36, 85

agenda planners, 31{33

block, 17, 18, 85

brainstorming, 15, 31, 46, 74, 76

break, 32, 34, 38, 43

caucus, 47

censoring, 44

checking the process, 42

clarifying questions, 13

clarity of process, 35

commitment, 3, 21, 24, 37

cooperation, 3{6, 8, 22, 23, 26, 28, 37,

42, 82

decisionmaking, iii, xiv, 3{6, 8, 11,

21, 23, 25, 26, 67, 69, 81, 82,

85, 86

doorkeeper, 39, 40, 75

empowerment, 24, 53, 56

equal access to power, 6, 25, 82

equalizing participation, 41

evaluation, xiv, 18, 27{29, 32, 34, 39,

76, 82, 86

expulsion, 45

facilitator, 13{18, 28, 31, 32, 34{39,

41{46, 60, 67, 73, 74, 76, 85

facilitator techniques, 41

_shbowl, 47

go-rounds, 46

good will, 8, 24, 36, 37

group discussion techniques, 16, 32,

45

identi_cation, 12, 45

introduction, xiii, 3, 69

listing, 42

meeting, xiii, 3, 4, 7, 12, 13, 17, 18,

27{29, 31{42, 44, 45, 58{62,

66{76, 85, 86

non-directive leadership, 35

notetaker, 15, 34, 39, 43, 46, 68, 75

opening, 32, 34

pacing, 42

participation, 4, 6, 7, 11, 24{26, 29,

31, 41, 45, 46, 65, 69

89

90 INDEX

passing the clipboard, 44

patience, 8, 24, 25

peacekeeper, 18, 37, 75

polling, 44

power, 4, 6, 23, 25, 26, 58{61, 81{83

public scribe, 38, 75

reformulating the proposal, 43

respect, xiv, 4{6, 22{26, 28, 40, 41,

44, 65, 69, 83

role, xiv, 7, 18, 25, 28, 29, 31, 35, 37,

38, 40, 43, 44, 66, 74, 75, 82,

83

silence, 14, 37, 42, 85

small group, 8, 37, 38, 42, 46, 47

social prejudice, 26

stacking, 42

stand aside, 17, 86

standard agenda, 32, 34

stepping out of role, 43

structure, xiv, 3, 4, 7, 11{13, 25{27,

33, 45, 65, 66, 69, 70, 81{83

summarizing, 43

taking a break, 43

techniques, xiv, 4, 7, 12, 13, 16{18,

29, 31{33, 35, 41, 42, 45, 74,

76, 81, 82

timekeeper, 38, 75

unity of purpose, 18, 22, 28

whole group, 6, 16, 17, 24, 36{38, 45{

47, 85, 86

About the Author

C.T. Lawrence Butler has lived an alternative lifestyle since he left col-

lege at the end of the Vietnam War. With a group of actors in Boston,

MA, he founded a theater production company and produced several o_-o_-

Broadway plays including Dracula, Sylvia Plath, and The Marlowe Show in

Boston and Fits, Seizures and Small Complaints in New York City. He is a

self-taught cook and has held a position as a head chef in a French restau-

rant. He has been a vegetarian for over 30 years and written a vegetarian

cookbook. He is a founding member of a worldwide, nonviolent, grassroots

activist movement known as Food Not Bombs. His nonviolent direct actions

against war, poverty and injustice have led to his being beaten, tortured and

arrested over 50 times in the United States without ever having committed

or been convicted of a crime. He is a proud father and parent to several

children. He has participated in a surrogate birth and helped raise a \step"

daughter who is a full-blooded Native American Aymara Indian from Bo-

livia. He has written three books: On Conict and Consensus, Food Not

Bombs: How to Feed the Hungry and Build Community, and, the soon to

be published, Consensus for Cities of 100,000. He travels extensively teach-

ing and lecturing on nonviolent conict resolution, consensus decisionmaking

and grassroots political organizing.

Before C.T. wrote On Conict and Consensus, and before mediation was

big business, C.T. was already developing his approach to nonviolence, aka

alternative conict resolution. He had a private practice helping couples,

individuals and groups mediate their conicts. Throughout the 1980s, he was

in demand for mediation and nonviolence trainings by various organizations

and grassroots activist groups. During the early years of the AIDS epidemic,

C.T. was recruited by the organization ACT UP Maine to teach nonviolence

trainings in preparation for nonviolent direct actions related to AIDS.

91

92 ABOUT THE AUTHOR

On Conict and Consensus was published in 1987. In it, he de_nes

his model of consensus called Formal Consensus. In the early 1990s, C.T.

shifted his e_orts from grassroots activism to focus his attention on teaching

workshops on Formal Consensus. Since then, he has facilitated over 60 For-

mal Consensus workshops in the US. In addition, various organizations have

sponsored workshops by C.T. in Stockholm, Ottawa, London, and Paris. A

wide variety of community groups and organizations have adopted Formal

Consensus as their decisionmaking process. The list includes:

_ Co-Housing Communities

_ Eco Villages

_ Homeless Advocacy Organizations

_ Native American Indian Tribes

_ Government Agencies

_ Boards of Directors of Non-pro_t Organizations

_ Social Change Groups

_ African Nonviolent Revolutionaries

_ Churches

_ Professional Organizations

_ Covens

_ Food Coops

_ Alternative Schools and Colleges

_ Anarchist Networks in Eastern Europe

_ Artist Collectives

_ Dance Communities

_ Independent Media Collectives

_ Families

In August 1999, C.T. sustained a serious head injury. He stopped travel-

ing and took an extended leave of absence from teaching. He reentered the

_eld in September 2005 by teaching a 2-day workshop with the Humanities

Department faculty at the University of Puerto Rico in Mayagez. In March

2006, he presented his _rst ever 4-day Training for Teachers (T4T) work-

shop. The workshop, held in Tucson, AZ, was a tremendous success with 30

participants from across the US, including two activists from Africa.

Currently, he is motivated to enlarge the scope of Formal Consensus by

addressing the use of consensus in large organizations and the use of consen-

sus as a form of government. His new book, Consensus for Cities of 100,000,

will address these topics and more.

93

Obtaining Copies

Copies of this book can be ordered by emailing

ctbutler@together.net or calling 1-800-569-4054.

To order via email, send the name and address where you want the books sent, the

number of books you are ordering, and, if the billing and shipping addresses are di_erent,

the name and address of the party to be billed. Single copies of the book cost $12.50

plus $2.50 in postage and handling for a total of $15. Orders of 10 or more receive a 20%

discount. You will receive the book by USPS in seven to 10 days.

C.T. Butler can also be reached at the following address:

Food Not Bombs Publishing

7304 Carroll Ave #136

Takoma Park, MD 20912

1-800-569-4054

email: ctbutler@together.net

The text may be found online at http://consensus.net/ or http://wandreilagh.org/consensus.pdf

| if you print a copy for personal or organizational use, we request you send $3.00 to

C.T. Butler at the above address for each copy. Do not print copies for resale.

95