Consent Decision-Making (Sociocracy)
A proposal goes ahead when nobody has an objection, not when everyone loves it. The group checks the need behind the proposal, hears it, asks clarifying questions, gives brief responses, and then checks for objections: reasoned arguments that the proposal would cause harm or that there is a worthwhile way to improve it. Objections are used to improve the proposal. Concerns are noted but do not block.
Use when a team needs to decide and move on without either a single person deciding or waiting for full consensus.
Solves: Decisions drag on for weeks because one person is not fully happy, or get pushed through and quietly undermined.
- 1
Step 1: Check that everyone understands and accepts the need (driver) the proposal responds to (3 min).
- 2
Step 2: The author presents the proposal (3 min).
- 3
Step 3: Clarifying questions only, no opinions yet (5 min).
- 4
Step 4: Brief response round: each person says in a sentence or two what they think of it (5 min).
- 5
Step 5: Consent round: each person says consent, concern or objection (3 min).
- 6
Step 6: Test each objection: does it show harm or a worthwhile improvement? Resolve real objections by amending the proposal and run the consent round again (10-20 min).
- 7
Step 7: Mark the decision, record concerns and set a review date (2 min).
- Keep the steps strict while the group is learning the process. Skipping steps is how confusion starts.
- Ask the objector what change would resolve their objection. They are the best source of the amendment.
- A review date makes it easier to consent to something imperfect.
- Use the same rounds to elect people to roles, with nominations instead of a written proposal.