Consensus is a popular word in today's culture. Somehow, the idea of getting everyone at the table to agree on everything under discussion has become the ideal achievement of teamwork and the truest evidence of great leadership. The only problem with this notion is that true consensus is an ever-elusive destination, and the journey toward it often results in frustration and wasted time.
While sitting in a meeting today, I experienced this wild goose chase first-hand. This last-minute gathering should have lasted one quarter of the time it did, but the inane quest for consensus made it a painfully drawn-out ordeal.
A small minority of people at the table raised relatively minor concerns about an event that had already been planned, approved, and communicated to the public. Those concerns were valid and had every right to be voiced, but despite the fact that the majority of those in attendance saw no reason to alter the already-scheduled event, we as a team were still expected to come to an eleventh-hour compromise. Because consensus demands that everyone leaves the meeting in agreement, each side spent a great deal of time trying to convince the other side of the worthiness of their cause.
After more than an hour of seeking consensus, our only achievement was a roomful of unnecessarily bruised egos and a cut-and-paste compromise that left neither side feeling content. The only real reason we reached any semblance of a "consensus" was that we were all tired of talking about the issue and we just wanted out of the room.
As I drove home, I thought about the fact that no one person in the meeting had leadership over the decisions surrounding that particular event. We were all equal members of a team, and each held equal sway over the others -- a recipe for disaster.
Leadership requires one person who will ultimately set a pace and direction that others can follow. Leaders should be eager to listen to concerns, advice, and ideas from the team, but eventually the final decision falls on them to make. Leaders don't often have the option make everyone feel equally validated, but they do tend make choices based on what's best. Consensus, on the other hand, typically results in frustration for everyone and produces a mediocre result in the process.
I've come to learn that the only people who can hold a position of leadership and also manage to achieve overwhelming consensus are brutal dictators. If true, effective leadership is desired in an organization, consensus should never be a definition for success.
Posts
