The Consensus Decision-Making Process Since the consensus decision-making process is not as formalized as others, such as Robert’s Rules of Order, the practical details of its implementation vary from group to group. However, there is a core set of procedures which is common to most implementations of the consensus decision-making process. Once an agenda for discussion has been set and, optionally, the ground rules for the meeting have been agreed upon, each item of the agenda is addressed in turn. Typically, each decision arising from an agenda item follows through a simple structure, as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Decision-Making Process Discussion of the Item The item is discussed with the goal of identifying opinions and information on the topic at hand. The general direction of the Forum/Consortium/Work Group and potential proposals for action are often identified during the discussion. Formation of a Proposal Based on the discussion, a formal decision proposal on the issue is presented to the Forum/Consortium/Work Group. Call for Consensus The facilitator of the decision-making body calls for consensus on the proposal. Each member of the Forum/Consortium/Work Group usually must actively state their agreement with the proposal to avoid the Forum/Consortium/Work Group from interpreting silence or inaction as agreement. Identification and Addressing of Concerns If consensus is not achieved, each dissenter presents his or her concerns on the proposal, potentially starting another round of discussion to address or clarify the concern. Modification of the Proposal The proposal is amended, re-phrased, or a rider is added, in an attempt to address the concerns of the decision-makers. The process then returns to the call for consensus and the cycle is repeated until a satisfactory decision is made. Roles in the Consensus Process Facilitator As the name implies, the role of the facilitator is to help make the process of reaching a consensus decision easier. Facilitators accept responsibility for moving through the agenda on time; ensuring that the Forum/Work Group adheres to the mutually-agreed mechanics of the consensus process; and, if necessary, suggesting alternate or additional discussion or decision-making techniques, such as go-arounds, break-out groups, or role-playing. The facilitator is often the Forum Director/The Open Group Staff Liaison. Timekeeper The purpose of the timekeeper is to ensure that the decision-making body keeps to the schedule set in the agenda. The timekeeper is often the Chair. Empathy or “Vibe” Watch The empathy watch – or “vibe watch” as the position is sometimes called – is charged with monitoring the “emotional climate” of the meeting, taking note of the body language and other non-verbal cues of the participants. Defusing potential emotional conflicts, maintaining a climate free of intimidation, and being aware of potentially destructive power dynamics, such as sexism or racism within the decision-making body, are the primary responsibilities of the empathy watch. Notes-Taker The notes-taker is identified at the start of the meeting. The role of the notes-taker or secretary is to document the decisions, discussion, and action points of the decision-making body in a set of minutes. Unlike other forms of decision-making, consensus minutes often make a point of documenting dissenting positions. Guidance Techniques for Effective Decision-Making