Originally published 6 November 2007. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
We all know people who think they are skilled at "knocking heads together" - and very useful they are too for those occasions when deep seated intransigence or sheer obstinacy prevents issues from moving forward.
True skills of consensus-building are vastly more subtle than the brute-force variety macho managers sometimes employ, and these skills need to be developed and nurtured in most large-scale organisations that need to deal with significant conflicts of interests. Some professions require them in large measure - community workers, conciliation officers or those mediating complex discussions on technical subjects, possibly? Diplomats, members of large design teams, project managers or planners, certainly? Other roles have traditionally disliked the whole notion of consensus and dismissed it as the wishy-washy namby-pamby middle-ground - a weak alternative to strong leadership that takes firm decisions, and then persuades others to follow.
If there is a trend, it is away from autocratic management towards a more consensual style, and the growth of consultation is, in part, a reflection of this global movement. If we take account of people's views and opinions, there is a better chance of implementing change or achieving success. But on this path towards greater consensus, there are many pitfalls.
Remember, consensus is not the same as unanimity. There is a real difference; and, for consensus to be meaningful, it must extend beyond the lowest-common denominator. The process should be deliberative, and offer participants the opportunity to consider seriously the position they adopt about various issues. Above all, it recognises that these positions are derived from values and beliefs that can sometimes be sensitive to probe, and not everyone feels comfortable with such an exercise.
Deploying such skills requires sound judgement, and an awareness of the risks and benefits. Timing is also important. There are times when a good public consultation is the ideal trigger for a genuine consensus-building effort. Perhaps the opposing viewpoints are now better understood; we know who says what, and we have the opportunity to re-examine the options to see if an accommodation can be made between various groups. But there are other occasions when the only worthwhile time is right at the start before the options have been formulated. This is what the nation's Town Planners have been urged to do!
Every public body needs people with specific know-how in this area; every public consultation department will need tools to use when the closing date is over and the "So what?" and "What next?" questions start to appear. But, most importantly of all, stakeholders and local communities will start to question whether public participation is worth the candle unless it leads to positive action to improve matters - and that is always best achieved when people sink their differences and proceed through maximum consensus Trigger points
- Audit your current skill-mix and determine whether you have sufficient staff with experience and skill in consensus-building
- Look for positive examples of successful consensus-building in your own organisation, and publicise as good practice role-models
This is the 82nd Tuesday Topic; a full list of subjects covered is available for Institute members and is a valuable resource covering so many aspects of consultation and engagement