Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 33 Next »

Systemic consensus (herein SysCon) is a decision making process that  takes a question as an input and gives a decision as an output. It was initially conceived of by Erich Visotschnig and Siegfried Schrotta in 2001, two ex-IBM system analysts from Austria.[website]

A key feature is the use of scalar, resistance voting: in contrast to the divisive plurality vote where people are often dragged into outcomes they didn't want, the resistance vote promotes collaboration by selecting the outcome most people can live with.[details] SysCon can occur in a number of formats, including mini, full (both offline) and online - all of which contain the same fundamental phases described below.

This form of decision making is not familiar to most people and requires practice to become comfortable with.

Error rendering macro 'panel' : com.atlassian.renderer.v2.macro.basic.validator.MacroParameterValidationException: Color value is invalid

The question


 

Participation self-selection


 

The Systemic consensus process


 

Express needs, wants and values


 

Individuals express their feelings towards the question.

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

 

Form proposals


 

Individuals form proposals to answer the question.

All proposals are included in the ballot, though considering the needs, wants and values of the group and the Proposal forming guidance will help form proposals that are less likely to meet resistance.

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.


 

Vote


 

Individuals vote against each proposal with a resistance rating.

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. 

 

The proposal with the lowest net resistance is selected. If 'Further solutions' is selected, the cycle restarts, otherwise the cycle stops. If the 'Zero option' is selected, then no action is taken.

 

*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.

The decision


 

  • No labels