Why isn’t consensus embraced?

If consensus is so wonderful then why doesn’t every group take it up? In a recent post, I spoke about 16 wins that come from using consensus-building approaches. So, if it achieves so may good results why is there resistance to consensus-based discernment?

Nothing is broken

There’s an old saying: “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it!” There are many people who think that the parliamentary model works just fine. So they don’t see any point in going to all the trouble of learning this newfangled consensus stuff!

The people who are content with the current approach are the people for whom it works. From the perspective of people for whom English is a second language, the less well educated, women, young people and the marginalized the current way decisions are made is broken. Ask these people if a parliamentary / Roberts Rules of Order approach is good for them.

It is also broken because way too many decisions do not get implemented. The same old issues keep returning. Decisions are made and they don’t get put into effect. Decision-making that doesn’t result in action is broken!

Consensus approaches are resisted because people with influence claim that nothing is wrong. Check it out for yourself – are they right? If you want to encourage consensus discernment processes in your church then start pointing out where the current model is broken.

Fear of Losing Power

As the old saying goes: “winners are grinners”. Who would not be happy with a process that improves their chance of getting what they want? So, naturally, people resist consensus discernment when its introduction threatens their power.

When changes are made in a system the equilibrium is upset. A repositioning of power takes place. There will be resistance from those who fear losing power. Consensus – despite all its benefits – is not taken up because it has enemies.

If you want to encourage consensus do not be naive. Expect opposition and plan ahead for how you can make and support the case for change in a highly ethical way.

Obstacles to Consensus in the Culture

By far the biggest obstacle to the embrace of consensus discernment is culture. Basically, we have it in our head that some things are valuable / sensible / right and others are not.

So in Western culture, we find the following.

  • ideas that are expressed in clumsy ways or tentative terms are regarded as inferior to those presented in clear and assertive words
  • asking questions is seen as nitpicking and a diversion from the main discussion
  • complexity is avoided in favor of pithy statements and confident speeches
  • passion is alright but don’t show too many feelings
  • analysing and exploring implications is seen as going off on a tangent – never regarded as a good thing!
  • being productive / fast is valued whereas going slowly is frowned upon
  • questions are perceived as challenges – as though the questioner has done something wrong
  • presenting an alternative point of view is seen as being negative or a conflict that must be solved as quickly as possible
  • once a majority view is said to exist everyone else is expected to get on board or be seen as a spoiler

Culture is hard to overcome. If you want to bring change you will have to challenge the prevailing culture and affirm its alternatives. Think about some of the ways that you can do this in a meeting. What affirmations can you offer to the people who are devalued? What interventions can you make or statements of another way can you offer? Find and affirm values from the Christian faith that align with consensus approaches to discernment.

Conclusion

Change to consensus needs to happen! There are many good reasons why this is so – at least 16!  Consensus is good for individuals and groups and yet this is not universally recognised. Resistance comes from a lack of awareness of the problems, fear of losing power and the influence of culture.

Support the people who experience the pain of the current approach, educate others about its limitations, take the power issues seriously and teach and model an alternative church culture.

Leading Through Conflict

Types of Leaders

Leading Through Conflict (Mark Gerzon) is the name of an important text for leaders. It is also an indispensable capacity for all who care about leading their community well. Leadership doesn’t happen by accident. Don’t be asleep on the job when conflict arises. Reflect on your style of leadership in a conflict and choose to be the best at leading that you can be!

Gerzon says that there are three types of leaders – and they engage with conflict in different ways. We all have the capacity to display the traits of each type of leadership. So be careful! The more we live in one “space” the more that becomes our dominant style.

Leading as a Demagogue

  • intensifies conflict
  • lacks compassion and dehumanizes persons on the other side
  • relies on ideology and not experience
  • prefers indoctrination to inquiry, misrepresentations over the truth
  • shuns complexity
  • tears down bridges and refuses to listen to new options

The Demagogue, and those who follow them, have contempt for the idea that reconciliation is possible. Therefore they prefer fear based exploitation of differences so that they can maintain their power.

The Demagogue wants to control the situation for their own ends.

Leading as a Manager

  • defines themselves by their place in the system
  • only pursues the interests of their group
  • does not think holistically but in narrow compartments of specialty or role
  • disregards the other
  • accepts existing boundaries

The Manager is often surprised by conflict because s/he doesn’t see the whole picture but only their part. So they usually struggle to generate options because of their narrow worldview. Managers hate conflict and try to “fix” it by managing the symptoms or trying to banish conflict by smothering it or through executive order.

Leading as a Mediator

  • is a steward of the whole rather than an owner of the parts (Admiral Joe Dyer, US Navy)
  • takes into account the whole and accepts complexity
  • welcomes diversity of contribution
  • commits to bridging divides and partnering with all stakeholders to do so
  • builds trust
  • delights in innovation and creative surprises
  • hopes and works to bring that hope to life

The Mediator type of leader accepts that conflict is inevitable in complex organisations. Respect for all points of view leads the Mediator to facilitate the capacity of diverse groups to listen to each other, think systemically, and to patiently inquire until there is a complete understanding of the issues.

Leading in the Mediator style uses the following 8 tools. They were first mentioned in the post 8 Steps to Turn Differences Into Opportunities. They will be expanded upon in the next post.

  1. Integral vision – acknowledging all sides of the conflict
  2. Systems thinking – understanding the connection between the factors that contribute to a conflict
  3. Presence – using all your emotional, spiritual, and mental resources to understand the nature of the dispute
  4. Inquiry – asking the right questions to get all the relevant information
  5. Conscious communication – making good choices about how you communicate during a conflict
  6. Dialogue – inspire people’s ability to work through the conflict
  7. Bridging – build partnerships that cross the borders that divide
  8. Innovation – foster breakthrough ideas and new options for resolving differences

Conclusion

In today’s complex world it is the Mediator style of leaders who have the most to offer. Think about conflicts in which you have been involved. Have there been times when you have shown the traits of the Demagogue, the Manager and/or the Mediator? Which approach resulted in the most innovation for finding a sustainable long-term solution?

Self-awareness is a key skill in effective leaders. As you engage in conflict situations note when you are behaving as these different types. Foster and build your capacity to function in Mediator mode. Think about a situation that your local congregation or group is facing right now. What skills of the Mediator type of leader can you employ in that situation? Plan for how to use the 8 steps that turn differences into opportunities.

We’d love to hear what works for you. Please share some of your experiences in the comments section.

1000 people tried consensus – how did it go?

WCRC General Council Logo 2017

The World Communion of Reformed Churches took a huge risk by using consensus as their way of discernment and decision-making. Around a 1,000 people met as the General Council in Leipzig June / July 2017 and consensus was new to the vast majority. How did it go?

What the Participants said

Martin Engles

Amy Eckert wrote a comprehensive article on the process, its goals and values. In it she interviewed a number of participants. Here are some of their observations.

Within the small groups the real work of discernment takes place. “Discernment truly is more about listening than speaking,” said Gradye Parsons. “It is important to listen to what others are saying. It is important to listen to what God is saying. And it’s important to consider your own thoughts with regard to the issue and in light of what you have heard.”

Rev. Lucy Wambui Waweru, minister of the Presbyterian Church of East Africa serving the Nyeri Church in central Kenya, values very much the input that ordinary delegates have on the process within the small groups.

“Discernment Groups include voices from around the world,” she said. “The groups also have a mix of older, more seasoned ecumenists as well as younger delegates. And every voice is heard.”

What is different?

Rev. Annedore Held Venhaus, minister in the Evangelical La Plata Church in Tres Arroyos, Argentina, really likes the notion of the colored cards. “I like how the cards express a feeling, not a decision,” she said. “I feel warm to this idea, I feel cool to it. I found that very interesting.”

“Just because I raise my orange card doesn’t mean I know that my home church will accept the proposal,” she said, “and it doesn’t mean I know how my home church will implement it. My orange card only means that I believe God is calling us to journey in this direction. It’s all about a willingness to begin a process.”

Rev. Annedore Held Venhaus, minister in the Evangelical La Plata Church in Tres Arroyos, Argentina, really likes the notion of the colored cards. “I like how the cards express a feeling, not a decision,” she said. “I feel warm to this idea, I feel cool to it. I found that very interesting.”

Waweru agreed. She also appreciated that giving consensus did not mean that a delegate was 100% supportive or opposed to a proposal. Nor did it mean that the delegate envisioned a clear path toward adoption of the new proposal.

“Just because I raise my orange card doesn’t mean I know that my home church will accept the proposal,” she said, “and it doesn’t mean I know how my home church will implement it. My orange card only means that I believe God is calling us to journey in this direction. It’s all about a willingness to begin a process.”

If you were at the General Council of WCRC we would love to hear your comments. Also any questions are very welcome.

You can read the whole article on the WCRC website.

Enough! It’s time to show some courage.

Where are the leaders who are ready to show some courage? Where are those who will risk losing everything for the sake of the reign of God?

People are tired of the fighting

I talk with a lot of people from around the world. Many come from churches where there are major disputes. Most Christians are sick and tired of the aggressive, disrespectful way in which debates happen. So, they want leaders who will find a way to resolve problems in the church without trying to control and remove their opponents.

Framing debates as “yes” or “no”; “left” or “right”; “liberal” or “conservative” is not helping. Forcing people to argue from the extremes is proving to be ineffective in resolving conflict. Yet people in many churches seem to be rewarded for being warriors for their extreme position. However this is alienating for people inside and outside the church.

People are looking for leaders who have courage. The church needs people who have the courage to take the risk of not fighting! People in the pews are tired of the paralysis that afflicts their church when disagreements go on and on.

What does courage look like?

Courage is being prepared to

  • give up my desire to control others
  • value relationships over power
  • trust that God knows best and so be open to change
  • believe that God desires the unity of his family
  • acknowledge that I have made God in my own image when God hates all the same people that I do
  • do unto others as I would have them do to me
  • love my enemies and pray for those who persecute me

Please add to this list from your own heart. What is hard for you to do in support of fostering a faithful, loving, quality Christian community?

Seek relationships instead of control

The only way to get past the paralysis that comes from hyper partisanship is by seeing the other person as a fellow human being.

There are many examples of where constructive and life giving options have been generated as people stop seeking control and work on the relationship. Perhaps the most powerful and common example is in divorces and setting up parenting plans. When a couple have a toxic relationship it harms the children; makes them bitter for longer; it is destructive and costly; makes later adaptations to the plan difficult;  and limits the number of options. As couples focus on the children and take time to understand the needs of the other person, they generate better solutions that are easier to live with.

It’s the same for disputes in the wider society and the church. Of course it is not easy for people to just switch off their desire for control – that’s why mediators are needed. It isn’t easy for some Christians to stop wanting to demonise their opponents and to get their way -that’s why facilitators are needed. Taking up the alternative of showing respect, de-escalating the tension and looking for alternative solutions does not come easy.

Seek relationships over control. You don’t have to change your mind on the issues in dispute. But you should change your attitude to the other person and the issue.

Will people seek relationships over control?

I like to think that the Holy Spirit will make it possible! But faith is an act of will, as much as it is a gift of grace. People have to choose to be obedient to Christ.

God has created a community through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. We are incorporated into that community through trusting (faith) in what God has done in Jesus. Our responsibility as disciples is to live in this community that gathers around Christ. This community is our primary identity. It is God’s will that we be one for the sake of the witness of Christ in the world.

When we are convinced that the quality of our discipleship as Christians is more important to God than our opinions on theological and ethical issues then we will choose relationships over control. The early observers of Christians did not say “Look at those Christians – see how they agree with one another.” Rather it was said “Look at those Christians – see how they love one another.”

People will seek relationships over control when they have the courage to believe the Gospel that we are one in Jesus Christ. However, this unity is not achieved by what we do, but by what God has done in Jesus Christ.

Does it happen in real life?

It is somewhat sad, but perhaps encouraging, that most of the examples of success come from outside the church. It is encouraging because if fighting spouses, political enemies, and hostile opponents on moral issues in society can do it then Christians should find it easier.

People move from control to relationships when they:

  • know that the present way of working is destructive
  • have a hope that things can work better
  • have a unifying principle, eg being citizens, family, fellow believers, etc
  • show courage by giving up power
  • habit disrupting rules are put in place
  • firm structures are put in place
  • thoughtful questions are offered

Mark Gerzon in The Reunited States of America, offers numerous examples of community organisations that are helping people to make the move from hyper partisan and aggressive approaches to healthy and respectful discussions. I recommend that you buy the book.

You can also look up some previous posts on this site for how change can happen, for example here. Or find examples of where and how change has happened in The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together.

Be of good courage, keep the faith, hold strong to the calling that you have in Jesus Christ.