Consensus Opinion Coercive

Overthought Perception Is Not Insightful & Often Narrow

Opinions Often Fail to Sustain

Therefore

Consensus Opinion Coercive Costly & Cosmetic

A search for a management panacea was started against the backdrop of chaotic conditions created by the high-level talk of AI and allied technological ‘demons’ paving the way for the end of the humanity. Those searching seem to have settled on ‘Consensus Management’.

To describe this new found panacea as ‘coercive, costly and cosmetic’ may appear irreverential to many stalwarts and some sections of general public too.

But, this description of consensus reform is very much in consonance with the following excerpts from a paper in the IMF journal: Fads and Fashion in Economic Reforms: “While this …….may seem frivolous, a review of the ideas that have guided thinking and action about economic reforms --- shows that they are as faddish as skirt lengths and tie widths.”

The history books are full of examples of disasters resulting from acting on consensus decisions.  The Bay of Pigs decision of Kennedy was a consensus, although it is on record that some officials had doubts but preferred to keep quiet. The other big disasters due to consensus-based decisions were the Vietnam War and the crash of the Challenger spaceship. The concept has been criticized by eminent philosophers.

Plato, a philosopher of ancient Greece, believed in a hierarchy of knowledge, with opinion being the lowest form. According to Plato, knowledge is the understanding of what truly is, while ignorance is attached to what is not. Opinion lies between these two, depending on what is and what is not.

------------------------------------

Genius abhors consensus because when consensus is reached thinking stops. Stop nodding your head.

-----Albert Einstein

---------- -------------------------

Moreover, studies have shown that only 3-5 percent of organizations have actually implemented this concept in their daily operations. Though the theory of consensus or participative management is as old as the institution of employees and employers, still it is not applied by a large proportion of organizations

In spite of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary about this concept why does the idea of consensus management mesmerise a wide section of the hard-headed business people and many others?. It is gaining wider and wider acceptance particularly in the intellectuals’ circles and forums.  It is in the DNA of the humanity. We are brought up with the distilled miraculous wisdom capsules like ‘ten heads are better than one’ or ‘unanimity of opinion is divine’.

But, there is also a wisdom capsule: “if everyone in the room thinks the same thing, no one is thinking very much”.

Misconception of Japanese Bottom-up System (Ringi)

The idea was in currency in the post-world war days but under a different heading ‘Bottom up Japanese Management’ is better than the American concept of top-down ‘order and obey’ system.

To develop consensus, the idea of holding meetings to hear all voices spread widely. In a survey by Insider, the findings were shocking: “everyday Americans conduct 11 million meetings. What's worrying is 92% of the workforce considers these meetings unproductive and costly. A third of them are unproductive, and can cost organizations up to $37 billion”. And that's just the US alone - conditions may not be very different elsewhere.

Most participants in such idea sharing meetings concede individuals feel both direct and indirect pressure from the group or leader to remain silent. It can also cause stress and tension, as individuals are conflicted about whether to follow their beliefs or subscribe to those of the wider group.

As stated above the consensus thinking was reinforced by the post-war Japanese miraculous recovery and world market dominance. But, Charles Yang, an executive in Japan with rich experience, had punctured the glorious picture in his paper “Demystifying Japanese Management Practices” in his succinct statement: “In other words the bottom-up process merely disguises the true decision-making pattern which generally runs top-down”.

The Mirage of Equality Basis of Consensus

The proponents of the Consensus Method aver that it gives equal say to all, boosts morale and ensures quicker sharing and acceptance of new ideas as they have been involved in developing them. The same reasons facilitate faster implementation of decisions at lower costs. 

Such a claim of miraculous results by treating all as equals reminds one of the saying, “Philosophy begins when commonsense ends”. We must remember that the most alluring and often repeated idea, “Liberty Equality Fraternity” has remained an empty slogan as is evident from the ever rising income and social status disparities

And leaving aside self-pride, let’s ask ourselves ‘how can all stakeholders be equals when the psychologists in the ‘test books’ affirm: “The phenomenon of individual differences revolves around the remarkable variations that exist among individuals in terms of their behaviours, traits, emotions, and cognitive abilities. Each person is a unique tapestry of characteristics that shape their distinct identity.” 

Apart from psychologists’ findings, even ancient rishis acknowledged that people differ and leadership skills are rare. A Sanskrit verse makes this clear: Shateshu jayate shurrah, sahasreshu cha panditah, wakta das sahasreshu, data bhawati wa na wa  (शतेषु जायते शूर, सहस्रेषु च पंडितः।वक्ता दशासहस्रेषु, दाता भवति वा न वा।।); which in liberal translation means One in hundred can be valorous, one in thousand can be a pundit, one in ten thousand can be an orator and a generous and altruistic benefactor may or may not be there (i.e. very rare).

Decision making is a risky, onerous and tough process that has to ensure rigorous implementation to provide benefit to the target groups, and also, more importantly, to avoid adverse repercussions on other groups and future plans. 

To achieve such results, leaders have to possess all the above rare virtues particularly, communication skills, empathy and a deep understanding of principles of connected subjects. For this, one has to have an unquenchable curiosity to explore innovative ideas, voracious reading like Elon Musk and Warren Buffet, meaningful listening, comprehending fundamentals, reflecting on each learning item, avoiding own biases, prejudices, open-mindedness to accept own errors of judgement and others’ constructive ideas, take risks, show resilience in the event of failure and, above all, to revise/reverse own decisions.

The list looks like an inspiring plaque for warriors. Yes, it is! Managing an enterprise is most daunting, Herculean and is like wizardry. The current reality in the business world supports the ‘commercial wars’ idea. These facts are proof: (i) the average life-span of Fortune 500 companies is reported to have been reduced from 60 to 15 years in the last 50 years (ii)  it is forecast by experts that 75% of the existing companies in the current Fortune 500 list are likely to be replaced by new ones in the next 5 years (iii) over 92% of start-ups fail in 3 years (iv) the turmoil in the financial world with bank bankruptcies and spiralling insolvencies tantamount to ‘war wreckages’. 

Under the warlike conditions, executives in a conference room draw comfort without any accountability risk to give opinions and arrive at consensus. But how many can face the risks, take to arms and rush to the war front? Only a few is the conclusion of eminent writers in their paper in the Harvard Business Review titled Why Capable People Are Reluctant to Lead, where they have given eye-opening reasons. If ‘capable people’ are reluctant to lead what is the sense in ushering in the “Consensus Management”?

One more vitally important reason for the all-round reluctance to adapt the ‘consensus method’ is that in the kaleidoscopic business environment opportunities just spring up and, if not immediately cashed can be lost.

Pragmatic Approach

All above reasoning is not an attempt to belittle the critical importance of the role of stakeholders’ viewpoints while making decisions. That can be very effectively done by giving opportunities to voice views/give suggestions voluntarily and wilfully without any implicit compulsion/influence.

Long to understand the best way to achieve stakeholders’ participation without any sense of coercion? A case in ln point illustrates this very clearly.

After he sacked Iacocca, Henry Ford appointed Peterson, an insider with long time service in the company, as the CEO. With his rich experience in the company, Petersen dreamed of an ingenious idea. He decided to create a dream car for Americans, a car that would beat all other auto giants and become the number one in the competitive auto industry. He realised that the new car development system followed the secretive R&D process which kept a lot of talented employees out of the project. According to an account in Waterman's book, he took the great risk of reversing this process, damned the secrecy and announced the basic idea of the new car to all employees. Petersen called for suggestions from all of them and many poured in, some very valuable ones. Encouraged by the response, he took an unprecedented and “apparently stupid way by industry norms" to display the Taurus car drawings on the walls for everyone to see and give suggestions. 

And when Ford Taurus was launched, it received an overwhelming response from customers and went on to be selected as the 'Car of the Year 1986'! This helped Ford Motor Company "to outearn" General Motors in 1986, for the first time since 1924. And Petersen also earned four times what Henry Ford II had ever earned in a year. Ford's stock saw an 11-fold rise in 1981. Petersen was truly a wizard!!

An outstanding and shining solid example of involvement and participation of all sans coercion.

So, the mantra for success in blizzardy environment is to be pragmatic, empathetic and charismatic – everyone would trust and admire you. With these assets you can make miracles!

Wizards Of the World!

Spread Your Creed of Positive ‘Change’

Through

Charity, Humility, Accessible, Rejuvenate, Inclusive, Sincere, Mesmeric, Amity