Tools for Consensus

---

• Meeting Procedure:
  • Before meeting:
    • Choose a facilitator.
    • Gather agenda items.
    • Delegate responsibilty for each item.
    • Divide into reports/decisions/anouncements.
    • Bring materials/supplies needed.
  • At meeting:
    • Connect (game, song, ritual, etc.).
    • Check-in/excitement sharing.
    • Review agenda items.
      • prioritize.
      • set times.
    • Choose roles (if not already).
      • facilitator.
      • vibeswatcher (or caretaker).
      • notetaker.
      • timekeeper.
    • Go through agenda.
      • easy items first (reports, then decisions).
  • Facilitation techniques:
    • decision-making process.
    • discussion, problem solving tools.
    • conflict, stress resolution techniques.
  • Announcements.
  • Set next meeting.
  • Evaluation.
  • Closing.
• Role of Facilitator:
  • Watches content of meeting.
  • May formulate agenda (beforehand).
  • Calls on speakers.
  • Helps group to:
    • clarify issues.
    • focus discussion.
    • prioritize.
    • bring out all viewpoints.
    • look for underlying agreement.
    • synthesize differences.
  • Restates proposals.
  • Formalizes decisions.
  • Equalize participation.
    • draws out quiet people.
    • limit talkers.
  • Uses facilitation techniques.
  • Stays neutral while facilitating.
• Role of Vibeswatcher:
  • Watches the process of meeting.
  • Senses underlying feelings.
    • check body language and tone of voice.
  • Stops bad process.
    • prevent domineering, guilt trips, interrupting, space-outs, insults.
  • Helps resolve conflict.
  • Helps work out negative emotions.
  • Suggests tools to improve meeting.
  • Sets an accepting tone.
  • Deals with distractions.
• Problem Solving Tools:
  • Brainstorms
  • Go-rounds
  • Small group discussions
  • Pairs/triads
  • Feeling sharing
  • Fishbolws
  • Roleplays
  • Participation equalizers
  • Evaluations (during and end)
  • Visual aids
  • Prioritization techniques
  • Strategy development
• Conflict Resolution Tools:
  • Matching and pacing
  • Active listening exercises
  • Fishbowls
  • Modelling of opposite viewpoints
  • Gripes session
  • Resentment sharing
  • Criticism/self criticism
• Stress Reduction Techniques:
  • Feeling sharing
  • Singing
  • Humor
  • Affirmation
  • Calm voice
  • Deep breathing
  • Silence
  • Back rubs
  • Eye contact
  • Breaks, games
• Brainstorm Principles:
  In a brainstorm, the group thinks together, like one collective brain. In and of itself, therefore, it is a good way to appreciate our neural inter-connectedness and synergy.
  • Say whatever occurs to you that is relevant to the question.
  • Don't explain or defend your ideas.
  • Don't judge or discuss the ideas of others.

Satyagraha Campaigns

Rules:

1) Self-reliance: do not depend on those over whom you have no control for anything crucial to your campaign. 2) Keep the initiative: even while awaiting a reaction from the opponent, continue to take constructive action. 3) Provide continual informational propaganda. 4) Reduce demands to a minimum, but never surrender essentials in negotiations. 5) Avoid a static condition in the movement. 6) Examine openly and honestly whatever weaknesses appear in the movement at any time. 7) Never abandon the search for an avenue of cooperation with the opponent on honorable terms. Make the problem, not the opponent, the butt of the attack. 8) Insist on full agreement on the fundamentals before abandoning the movement.

Code of discipline:

1) Refuse to return the assaults of the opponent. 2) Refrain also from insults. 3) Protect the opponents from any physical attack --- court their trust. 4) Do not resist arrest or attachment of property. Do not defend territory, defend ideas and ideals. 5) If taken prisoner, behave in a manner befitting a satyagrahi. 6) Obey the orders of the chosen leaders. Resign if you cannot, in conscience, do so. If dissatisfaction is widespread, a new leader should be chosen. 7) Expect no guarantees of safety or victory. The method is not infallible. Nevertheless, maintain courage and confidence. To lose morale is to lose the struggle.

These guidelines were developed by Gandhi over many years of political struggle. Though they are not all directly relevant to our own work, their spirit and insight should serve as important models for our activities.

---

A Paradigm Shift

A working definition of paradigm is "an encompassing framework or theory that, although never proven in an absolute way, fits the current reality of events so well that it becomes accepted as reality and is not questioned or challenged to any great degree, until a new paradigm begins to take shape."
Examples:

• Ptolemy's universe (earth is center) vs. Copernicus' universe (sun is center) vs. Kepler's universe (sun is one star). or:
• Newtonian physics vs. Relativity theory vs. Quantum physics.

In the social realm, consider the essential abolition of slavery on a global level during the 19th century, the ascendancy of women's suffrage in Western society at the turn of the century, etc. Now we face that kind of general conceptual framework change in the arena of conflict resolution; from violence and coercion as the basic premise to nonviolence and the assimilation of truth.

• An eye for an eye vs. turn the other cheek.
• Might makes right vs. right makes might.
• Peace through strength vs. "there is no way to peace; peace is the way."

Nonviolence as a means of exercising social and political power:

The opponent in a nonviolent struggle is likely to have available a variety of coercive and repressive resources. Our government has at its disposal weapons, troops, jails, intelligence-gathering machinery and personnel. In nonviolent struggle, we do not attempt (as in violent conflict) to meet the opponent with the same weapons systems or tactics. Our effort is geared primarily toward limiting or countering the opponent's expression of power. Our goal is to weaken the power position of the opponent relative to ours. We desire to alienate existing support of the opponent, prevent the accrual of further support, and to undermine the opponent's ability to continue the policy or practices which we object to.

We are not in the business of directly challenging the government's military might. It is clear that we could never hope to mount a successful campaign of violence to produce the desired change in our opponent (and don't forget the "means vs. ends" trap). A violent challenge to a violent system would only serve to bolster and justify the opponent's perceived need for military posturing. Thus, we do not attack the opponent's power directly; instead, we seek to gain control of the sources of power. Our actions are aimed at changing our power position relative to that of our opponent. We do this by challenging the basis for power in terms of authority, human resources, public consent, public opinion and credibility.

In this way, if our campaign is properly designed and executed, the opponent is required to deal with issues. A forum is engendered in which debate, dialogue and ideas become the weapons. We are trying to create an atmosphere for the clarification of truth. We know that we have no monopoly on the truth ourselves, but we insist that our portion of the truth be heard and acknowledged. Further, we wish to know the truth in the opponent's position. Our goal in nonviolent struggle is to arrive at sane, humane, and just policies based on a more complete understanding of the issues by the participants on each side of the struggle and by the interested, concerned, and informed public.

---

Steps of Consensus

• Problem Stated (What are we talking about?)
• Question clarified (What needs to be decided?)
• Discussion (What are all the views?)
• Proposal made (What action will the group take?)
• Discussion (Speak to proposal, clarifying questions, good points, concerns...)
• Modify Proposal by amendments or withdraw.
• Test for Consensus:
  a) Restate proposal b) Call for concerns c) Call for objections within consensus, reservations, stand asides d) Call for blocks e) Attempt to incorporate objections of blockers f) If unable, decision is blocked g) Consensus reached. Show visual, verbal agreement!
• Decision implemented, assign tasks

Consensus

Consensus

from the Diablo Canyon Blockade/Encampment Handbook

---

What is Consensus? Consensus is a process for group decision-making. It is a method by which an entire group of people can come to an agreement. The input and ideas of all participants are gathered and synthesized to arrive at a final decision acceptable to all. Through consensus, we are not only working to achieve better solutions, but also to promote the growth of community and trust.

Consensus vs. Voting: Voting is a means by which we choose one alternative from several. Consensus, on the other hand, is a process of synthesizing many diverse elements together.

Voting is a win or lose model, in which people are more often concerned with the numbers it takes to "win" than with the issue itself. Voting does not take into account individual feelings or needs. In essence, it is a quantitative, rather than qualitative, method of decision-making.

With Consensus people can and should work through differences together and synthesize seemingly contradictory ideas. We believe that people are able to talk peacefully about their differences and reach a mutually satisfactory position. It is possible for one person's insights or strongly held beliefs to sway the whole group. No ideas are lost, each member's input is valued as part of the solution.

Abalone Alliance and Consensus: It is for all the above reasons that the Abalone Alliance has structured its decision-making process on both pure and modified forms of consensus. Throughout the blockade/encampment, all decisions will be made on this basis; it is crucial that all participants understand consensus, and how to use it in their affinity groups and in spokescouncils.

Nuts and Bolts of Consensus: Consensus does not mean that everyone thinks that the decision made is necessarily the best one possible, or even that they are sure it will work. What it does mean is that in coming to that decision, no one felt that his/her position on the matter was misunderstood or that it wasn't given a proper hearing. It also means that the final decision doesn't violate someone's fundamental moral values, for if it did they would be obligated to block consensus. Hopefully, everyone will think it's the best decision; this often happens because, when it works, collective intelligence does come up with better solutions that could individuals. But, it may occasionally not, and then the decision may just be the one supported by the most people. Those who object can do one of several things:

--- Non-support ("I don't see the need for this, but I'll go along.") --- Reservations ("I think this may be a mistake but I can live with it.") --- Standing aside ("I personally can't do this, but I won't stop others from doing it.") --- Blocking ("I cannot support this or allow the group to support this. It is immoral.") --- Withdrawing from the group.

Obviously, if many people express non-support or reservations, stand aside or leave the group, it may not be a viable decision even if no one directly blocks it. This is what is known as a "lukewarm" consensus and it is just as desirable as a lukewarm beer or a lukewarm bath.

Forming the Consensus Proposal: During discussion a proposal for resolution is put forward. It is amended and modified through more discussion, or withdrawn if it seems to be a dead end. When a proposal seems to be well understood by everyone, and there are no new changes asked for, the facilitator(s) can ask if there are any objections or reservations to it. If there are no objections, there can be a call for consensus. If there are still no objections, then after a moment of silence you have your decision. Only the beginning, of course, now you have to carry it through.

Once consensus does appear to have been reached, it really helps to have someone repeat the decision to the group so everyone is clear on what has been decided.

If consensus is blocked and no new consensus can be reached, the group stays with whatever the previous decision was on the subject, or does nothing if that is applicable. Major philosophical or moral questions that will come up with each affinity group will have to be worked through as soon as the group forms. (See "Principles of Unity" in the "Affinity Group" section.)

The fundamental right of consensus is for all people to be able to express themselves in their own words and of their own will. The fundamental responsibility of consensus is to assure others of their right to speak and be heard. Coercion and trade-offs are replaced with creative alternatives, and compromise with synthesis.

Roles in a Consensus Meeting: There are several roles which, if filled, can help consensus decision-making run smoothly. The facilitator (or co-facilitators) aids the group in defining decisions that need to be made, helps them through the stages of reaching an agreement, keeps the meeting moving, focuses discussion to the point at hand, makes sure everyone has the opportunity to participate, and formulates and tests to see if consensus has been reached. Facilitators help to direct the process of the meeting, not its content. They never make decisions for the group. If a facilitator feels too emotionally involved in an issue or discussion and cannot remain neutral in behavior, if not in attitude, then s/he should ask someone to take over the task of facilitation for that agenda item.

A vibes-watcher is someone besides the facilitator who watches and comments on individual and group feelings and patterns of participation. Vibes-watchers need to be especially tuned in to the sexism of group dynamics.

A recorder can take notes on the meeting, especially of decisions made and means of implementation and a time-keeper keeps things going on schedule so that each agenda item can be covered in the time allotted for it (if discussion runs over the time for an item, the group may or may not decide to contract for more time to finish up).

Even though individuals take on these roles, all participants in a meeting should be aware of and involved in the issues, process, and feelings of the group, and should share their individual expertise in helping the group run smoothly and reach a decision. This is especially true when it comes to finding compromise agreements to seemingly contradictory positions.

Consensus and Action: The goal of every decision-making process is not just to decide on a solution, but also to carry out that plan of action. Without subsequent action, decisions are totally meaningless. This is often overlooked. It seems that a person's commitment to any decision is in proportion to their sense of participation in that decision. Consensus attempts to involve all members of a group, not just the "leaders".

Consensus clearly takes more time than a simple vote. But the added time can be viewed in relation to the increased understanding each member of the group will have about the issue and the increased probability of the decision being carried out; longer decision time but shorter implementation time.

Most deadlock situations are, however, mixed up with emotions. If the root of someone's objections to a proposal is really their personal dislike for the proponent(s), then hopes for resolution are virtually nil until these personal issues are addressed. For consensus to work, the group must be able to identify and work out emotional problems and feelings.

"He listened and listened. His entire body was an ear"

Spokescouncils: When operating in a large group, each affinity group selects one person to act as their spokesperson. These "spokes" carry affinity groups' opinions and proposals to spokescouncils of all the affinity groups' reps; they are not empowered to make any final decisions without first consulting their affinity groups (unless it is a pre-determined empowered spokescouncil). Spokes to try to consolidate, synthesize, and iron out differences between proposals so as to create a proposal(s) agreeable to all. Information is then relayed back to the affinity groups by spokes, the issues at hand reconsidered, and a new position (or perhaps the same old one) is reached. These positions are once again brought to the spokescouncil. If consensus is reached, great. If not, the process may be repeated again or the group may decide to return to the previously agreed upon position.

---

Attitudes and behavior which help a group reach consensus:

--- Responsibility: Participants are responsible for voicing their opinions, participating in the discussion, and actively implementing the agreement. --- Self-discipline: Blocking consensus should only be done for principled objections. Object clearly, to the point, and without put-downs or excessive speeches. Participate in finding an alternative solution. --- Respect: Respect others and trust them to make responsible input. --- Cooperation: Look for areas of agreement and common ground, and build on them. Avoid competitive, right/wrong, win/lose thinking. --- Struggle: Use clear means of disagreement --- no put-downs. Use disagreements and arguments to learn, grow, and change. Work hard to build unity in the group, but not at the expense of the individuals who are its members.