Introduction
Systemic consensus is a decision making process developed by Erich Visotschnig and Siegfried Schrotta - two ex-IBM system analysts from Austria - in 2001.[website] A key feature is the use of scalar, resistance voting: in contrast to the competition-promoting plurality vote where people can be dragged into outcomes they didn't want, the resistance vote promotes collaboration by selecting the outcome most people can live with.[details] Systemic consensus can occur online and offline, in short and full formats - all of which contain the same fundamental stages described below.
NB: This form of decision making is probably not what you're used to and requires practice and reprogramming of old habits.
Overview
The systemic consensus process takes a question as an input and gives a decision as an output.
Express needs, wants and values
Individuals express their feelings towards the question by writing down their needs, wants and desires. This safe space for personal, emotional expression provides a connection between participants: This is important because the whole process is emotionally quite 'cold' and deliberately avoids discussion. 'Needs, wants and values' should just reflect how people feel about the question with proposals withheld for the next stage in the process
3.b Form proposals
Individuals consider the needs, wants and values of the group then form proposals to answer the question. All proposals are included in the ballot, though there are some tips and tricks for writing them in a way that is less likely to meet resistance: Forming good proposals - a short guide
In addition to proposals from individuals, two control proposals are always included;
- Zero option: We keep everything as it is and change nothing. This should include a description of 'how everything currently is' before the vote begins.
- Further solutions: We look for other solutions. The cycle restarts on the same question: participants express NWVs, form proposals then vote again.
Individuals come up with proposals considering the question, the NWVs of the group and proposal forming guidance.
3.c Vote
The final stage of the cycle is to vote. This vote is a could be considered 'negative rating': every single proposals is voted against by every participant by expressing a negative rating. All scales start at zero which expresses the absence of resistance. The scale has a maximum value which expresses maximum resistance.
It is essential that in addition to the proposals formed by participants the following two control proposals are always included in any vote*;
The resistances are recorded for each participant and the proposal with lowest resistance is selected - the proposal that most of the team have the least issue with. Relative total resistance (RTR) provides a useful indicator of decision acceptance with great decisions having 0 to 10 % RTR, good decisions having 10 to 20 % RTR and OK decisions having 20 to 30 % RTR. Decisions with an RTR of greater than 30 % should provoke concerns. RTR can be calculated as follows;
| Relative total resistance to proposal | equals | total resistance to proposal | divided by | max. rating of resistance scale | multiplied by | number of participants | multiplied by | 100 % |
*The one exception is if two or more proposals are tied with equal, minimum resistance. This leads to an immediate 'runoff' vote in which only the tied proposals are voted against with the same scale.
