Some Thoughts on Decision-making
The Process committee has been studying ways to engage the Meeting in a consideration of how we make decisions, as we face a prolonged period of needing to make important choices about our building plans. You’ll hear more later, but here are a few items worth pondering.
“…he speaks of two authentic and two inauthentic attitudes respecting participation in community. The two authentic attitudes are solidarity and opposition. The two inauthentic attitudes are conformism and noninvolvement. Expressing our solidarity or our opposition is to express our Truth. That is right-ordered action. Truth is good; Truth builds community because it is recognizable among us. The Truth is holy, whether we stand firmly for a particular action or against that action. But conformism and non-involvement represent our unwillingness to face our own truth or someone else’s. Our non-involvement — or worse, our withdrawal — are extremely destructive to community. That is one of the biggest fears — that people will withdraw or leave. If conflict arises, some people feel they do not have the energy to deal with it; there is already too much stress in life. They just want to be left out of it.
Pope John Paul II, when Cardinal Wojtyla
How do we know when we have made a sustainable decision? Or, if we have sufficient support to implement the decision? Suppose some people do not support the apparent sense of the meeting – as indicated by statements like “I don’t think this is right, but I don’t want to stand in the group’s way.” The gradients of agreement scale helps people to voice their less-than-whole-hearted support without fearing that their statement will be interpreted as “no.” The scale helps to explain one’s degree of reservation better than by merely saying “I stand aside."
Endorsement: “I like it and will help to implement.”
Endorsement with a minor point of contention: “Please note my point of contention. Basically I like it and will help to implement.”
Agreement with reservations: “I can live with it, but please consider my reservations if you need my help with implementation.”
Abstain: “I have no reservations of note and am in solidarity with the group’s decision. Don’t count on me for active helping in its implementation.”
Stand Aside: “I don’t like this, but I trust and defer to the discernment of the group. Don’t count on me for even passive help with implementation.”
Formal disagreement but still willing to go with the group: “I want my disagreement noted in the minutes, but I will accept the group’s decision. I will help with implementation only if others in the group are committing and thus everyone is expected to do so. “
Formal disagreement, with request to be absolved of responsibility for implementation: “I don’t want to stop the group’s decision-making, but I don’t want to be involved in implementing this outcome if decided.”
Block: “I don’t support that it is rightly ordered for the group to proceed in this way.”