Rough consensus
The problem is that too much feedback — even good, valid feedback — grinds decision-making to a halt. It's not good for individual productivity and mental health, and it's not good for the organization as a whole. But the alternative — working in silos with top-down decision-making — is arguably worse.
How can async-first teams balance transparency and openness to feedback with a bias for action?
— Twist: #04: Death by feedback
It would be nice if everyone could agree on the best solution to a problem. However, as the group of people grows, the odds of this happening shrinks. At a certain point, it is no longer a worthwhile endeavor to try and find unanimous agreement on a proposal. It simply takes too long, or it may be impossible.
Instead, the group should try to achieve "rough consensus". This means:
- Find a proposal that has the support and interest of at least a few people.
- Give everyone else the chance to raise objections. Ask, "Is there anyone who cannot live with this proposal?"
- Address this feedback
- The working group may be convinced that this is a real issue and will agree to change course.
- The working group may not be so convinced, but should try to accommodate the concerns within reason.
This means that a proposal could be passed even with dissenters. However, if this process is followed correctly, then any remaining objections should generally be those of taste. The accepted proposal ought to still work and solve the problem it is meant to solve.
This method requires trust in each other. As long as a proposal does not have provably blocking issues, then we should allow it to pass (but still raise and explain any objections you have!).
If you are raising an objection...
- Be clear about the nature of your objection. Is this a deal-breaker? Or do you have a preference towards an alternative?
- If it is a deal-breaker, make your feedback as clear as possible so that the decision-maker can address it properly. You have the burden of proof to show why the current solution will not work.
- If you believe the feedback is critical, then support that belief by spending the time and energy required to explain it fully and convincingly.
- Non-critical feedback is still valuable. Make it clear that the feedback is non-critical; for example: "This will work, but I prefer X because of reason Y."
If you are the decision-maker...
- Do not allow the conversation to get stuck on non-critical feedback. Address the concerns, and move on.
- If it is unclear whether feedback is critical or blocking, ask for clarification.
- You do not need majority rule. You need a solution that works.