EARLY BIRD PROMOTION: Register for the Masterclass by May 31 to secure lifetime(!) access. (Only 9 spots remaining)

More info.

Mastering Group Decision-Making: Striking the Perfect Balance

Lisa Gill
Written by Lisa Gill October 08, 2023

At the heart of any organizational culture is how we make decisions. In traditional organizations, there usually isn’t a particularly conscious agreement about how we make decisions. It’s often the manager who decides, or, if the organization is a bit more democratic, perhaps we might dabble majority vote and consensus decisions. However, those options can also be limiting.

In progressive organizations that espouse values like transparency and autonomy, it’s essential to learn at least two more decision-making methods:

  • Consent: This method, as seen in Sociocracy and Holacracy, involves approving a proposal if no one sees any reason to object. If there are objections, the group works to integrate them until the proposal is 'safe enough to try.’
  • The Advice Process: Here, an individual seeks advice from those affected by the decision and those with expertise before making a decision.

However, as I have written about before, reimagining organizations is not just about new structures. If we want to transform how we make decisions in our organizations, we need to not only learn new decision-making processes, but practice the ways of being and soft skills that go with those new processes as well.

Problems when experimenting with new decision-making methods

Here are three main problems I’ve encountered again and again with groups that try out more collaborative decision-making methods:

  • Power-over – One or more group members dominate (consciously or unconsciously), and the others are less involved/outspoken.

Example: The founder voices a strong opinion early in the decision process and other group members abstain or side with them because they don't trust that it's truly the group's decision (or that the founder will stand by the group's decision).

  • My preference – Decisions keep stalling because people raise objections but their objections are coming more (or only) from personal preference rather than from what's best for them and the group (or what's 'safe to try'). No one challenges the objections.
  • False harmony – Nobody has the courage or confidence to voice objections or concerns and so the decision suffers from lack of suggestions for improvement and, once it’s approved, lack of commitment and ownership.

The cumulative effect of these symptoms can result in outcomes such as a lack of innovation or forward momentum, a climate of cautiousness, resentment and gossiping, decision fatigue, erosion of trust, diminishing motivation, soulless meetings – the list goes on. So besides learning new decision-making processes, what can we do?

Finding the sweet spot in collaborative decision-making

Whether you are using asynchronous decision-making tools like Loomio or Murmur, or engaging in a synchronous, ‘live’ discussion, it’s important to practice how to be in the sweet spot between a constructive and destructive discussion.

Lisa Gill Sweet Spot Climate

If we’re too far over into the constructive side, we can end up stuck in false harmony with no one daring to object or voice a dissenting opinion.

Moves to help you escape the constructive trap

  1. Be open with what’s yours: Find your opinion and have the courage to express it, especially if you are an outlier. It really is a contribution! Dare to share your feelings and be vulnerable, rather than trying to look good or ‘win’.
  1. Delight in divergence, disagreement and dissent: People who disagree or have another perspective offer a gift to the group. Usually there is some wisdom in what they are sharing, an idea that will improve a proposal. Even if there isn’t, it’s an opportunity to create a culture of inclusion and involvement, to truly listen to and acknowledge their position and humanity. When people feel heard and seen, they are much more willing to consider a proposal outside of their own preferences.

And of course, if we tip too much into the destructive side of discussions, we end up with individuals being rigid or dominating. If someone is good at arguing, they may ‘win’, but it won’t be a truly collaborative decision.

Moves to help you escape the destructive trap

1. Be open to what’s theirs: Consider there is something valuable in other people’s viewpoints, opinions and feelings, especially if you don’t agree. Be curious and take some time to dig deeper by asking questions like: “What are you worried about?”, “What are you feeling?”, “What's important to you about [their words]?”

2. Cultivate willingness: “We remain attached to our narrowly defined self-interest only because of lack of trust that anything else would work, or that anyone else would care.” - Miki Kashtan

Lisa Gill Individual Preference source

In order to find a proposal or solution that isn’t achieved by domination or compromise, it is essential that we listen to each other’s needs, in line with a shared commitment to reaching a good outcome for the group. If we take the time to do this, we are often surprised by what becomes possible and available to us in the ‘mutual willingness’ zone.

Final tips for leveling up collaborative decision-making capacity

In a progressive organisation, we want to be agile when it comes to decision-making. Many standard decisions can be entrusted to a particular role or team. However, for significant decisions—those that affect many people, have long-term impacts, or involve high risks—we need to invest time in developing our capacity for collective decision-making. Initially, it might feel slow, but over time, we will become more skilled and efficient at reaching satisfying outcomes, even when things get tricky. Here are some tips.

  1. Find your sweet spot – aim to create a climate (whether virtual or in-person) in which you can have engaged, open and tough discussions about each other’s thoughts, feelings and needs in order to reach a truly collaborative decision. Encourage each other to be brave and respectful.
  2. Practice being able to be in the groan zone – the groan zone is that moment where it feels like you will never be able to converge on a decision. Instead of freaking out or rushing to get to a solution, recognize that this is part of the process. It can even help to name it: “Wow, it seems like we all have many different ideas on how to move forward here. What’s needed now, then?”
  3. Listen beneath the surface – in addition to the discussion happening ‘above the surface’ about the proposal, there is an ocean of activity happening ‘under the surface’. Interpersonal dynamics. Someone not feeling heard. Someone else is dominating. If you can pay attention to this, and put words to what you’re picking up, it can be a real contribution to the group. You don’t need to solve it; again just naming it can help the group decide together what to do with it.
  4. Do a decision autopsy – pick a collaborative decision you took recently that didn’t go well. Reflect together on what was missing. Were you too much in the constructive zone? Or too much in the destructive zone? What would you do differently next time? Any agreements that feel important to clarify about how you make decisions?

By mastering collaborative decision-making and embracing the sweet spot between constructive and destructive discussions, organizations can foster innovation, trust, and successful outcomes.

Written by Lisa Gill
Lisa Gill
Self-managing organisations coach and trainer, writer, and Leadermorphosis podcast host
Read more
Oct 29, 2023
From Sociocracy to Deep Democracy: Comparing Decision-Making Methods
Lennard Toma Written by Lennard Toma
When it comes to decision-making, there are several types of consent to choose from. Which one is best for your organization? Should you…
Read more about From Sociocracy to Deep Democracy: Comparing Decision-Making Methods
May 10, 2023
To Decide is Human: The Importance of Effective Decision Making in Organizations
Doug Kirkpatrick Written by Doug Kirkpatrick
Everyone makes a bad decision from time to time - that’s only human. While some bad decisions are obviously more impactful than others,…
Read more about To Decide is Human: The Importance of Effective Decision Making in Organizations
Dec 17, 2022
Let’s Fire All The Micromanagers
Joost Minnaar Written by Joost Minnaar
Micromanagers are by far the least popular managers. Nobody wants to report to one. Nobody wants to be one. The funny thing about…
Read more about Let’s Fire All The Micromanagers
Dec 10, 2022
"We’re All Leaders” Is A Better Way To Work
Ari Weinzweig Written by Ari Weinzweig
One of the most radical of all our approaches at Zingerman’s, we ask everyone in the organization, from the minute they start working with…
Read more about "We’re All Leaders” Is A Better Way To Work
Nov 12, 2022
Emotional Intelligence (EQ) in Leadership for Flat Organizations
Pim de Morree Written by Pim de Morree
The days of the traditional leader are over. (Well, if it were up to us.) Leadership can be much more dynamic than traditional pyramid…
Read more about Emotional Intelligence (EQ) in Leadership for Flat Organizations
Oct 15, 2022
The Great Resignation. Quiet Quitting. What The F***?
Pim de Morree Written by Pim de Morree
The Great Resignation was all the hype earlier this year. Then Quiet Quitting took over the headlines when hordes of people popularized…
Read more about The Great Resignation. Quiet Quitting. What The F***?
Read all articles

Download: Free Guide

Unlock our in-depth guide on trends, tools, and best practices from over 150 pioneering organizations.

Subscribe below and receive it directly in your inbox.

    We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe at any time.