Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Why Managing Dissenting Views is Critical for Good Group Decision Making

by JD Solomon Leave a Comment

Why Managing Dissenting Views is Critical for Good Group Decision Making

Why Managing Dissenting Views is Critical for Good Group Decision Making

Majority voting and consensus decision making are two distinct approaches to making decisions in group environments, each with its own characteristics and implications. Consensus decision-making is an alternative to debate and passage of proposals that can be approved through a majority vote. It does not emphasize the goal of the full agreement but instead focuses on acceptance or “living with it.” Choosing the right method for the context, and more importantly, managing the dissenting view, is important in making good group decisions.

Majority Voting

Majority voting is a decision-making process where the option that receives the most votes from the group is selected as the final decision. It is a straightforward and efficient method that allows decisions to be made quickly. In this approach, the majority opinion prevails, and the preferences of the minority may be disregarded. Majority voting is commonly used in various democratic systems, such as elections, where the winner is determined based on the highest number of votes.

Consensus Decision Making

On the other hand, consensus decision making aims to reach a general agreement or consent among all or a significant portion of the group members. Consensus-based decision making seeks solutions that are acceptable to everyone and considers the concerns and perspectives of all group members. This approach prioritizes cooperation, building relationships, and maintaining harmony within the group.

Criticisms of Consensus Decision Making

Critics of such a process believe that it can involve adversarial debate and the formation of competing factions. These dynamics may harm group member relationships and undermine the ability of a group to implement a contentious decision cooperatively. Consensus decision making requires more time because we explore (and often churn) the dissenting view.

Sometimes we are better as a group to have a debate, take a vote, and move on.

Positives of Consensus Decision Making

Consensus decision-making advocates believe the process results in better decisions by addressing potential concerns upfront and avoiding the lingering effects of lost votes. A better implementation is also a positive byproduct because everyone can “live with it.” And while extending the process can result in factions, proponents believe a cooperative, collaborative group atmosphere can foster greater group cohesion and interpersonal connection.

The Necessity of Recording Dissent

The one simple rule that defines a consensus decision-making process is the necessity of managing and recording dissent. Executive sponsors often do not wish to deal with a potentially messy process that can get political. While some organizations like the idea of building consensus, their culture is often more aligned with hiding or intimidating the dissenting view through majority voting.

When to Use Consensus Decision Making

Some of these situations include:

Complex and multifaceted issues

Consensus decision making allows for a more nuanced understanding of complex problems. By involving all stakeholders and encouraging active participation, diverse perspectives can be explored, leading to more comprehensive solutions that consider the various aspects of the issue.

High-stakes decisions

In critical decisions that have significant long-term consequences, consensus decision making can ensure, when properly facilitated, that all concerns and potential risks are thoroughly evaluated. This minimizes the likelihood of making hasty or ill-informed choices. The collaborative nature of consensus-based approaches also promotes shared responsibility and accountability.

Building trust and cohesion

Consensus decision making fosters a sense of trust, cooperation, and mutual respect among group members. It acknowledges the importance of maintaining positive relationships and values the input of each individual. This approach can enhance team dynamics, improve communication, and promote a supportive environment where everyone feels heard and valued.

Controversial topics

When dealing with controversial issues, consensus decision making can help address concerns and avoid polarization within the group. It encourages open dialogue, active listening, and finding common ground. Consensus-based approaches seek to bridge gaps and build consensus by exploring shared interests rather than emphasizing divisions.

Example: SC Statewide Water Master Plan

The SC Statewide Water Master Planning Framework include the following in its bylaws:

“Consensus is built upon identifying and debating all Members’ interests and attempting to satisfy those interests to the greatest extent possible. A consensus is reached when all voting Members (or their designated Alternate in the absence of the Member) agree that their interests have been thoroughly vetted so that each Member can “live with” the group’s final decision. Building consensus may involve proposing alternative solutions, assessing the impacts of those alternatives, and compromising. Consensus, however, does not necessarily mean unanimity. Some Members may strongly endorse a solution, while others may only accept it as a workable agreement. In a final consensus agreement, Members recognize that the resulting agreement is the best one that the voting Members can make at this time.”

The bylaws also recognized the need for Majority (or Super Majority) Voting, namely in amendments to the bylaws and adding or removing members from the planning committee.

Moving Forward

The choice of decision-making approach depends on the nature of the problem, the context, and the group’s goals. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each method allows for informed group decisions. The selection of the most appropriate approach for a given situation is significantly impacted by the facilitation and the culture of the organization in dealing with dissent.

This post first appeared on Substack.


Communicating with FINESSE is the community of technical professionals dedicated to being highly effective communicators and facilitators. Learn more about our publications, webinars, and workshops. Join the community for free.

JD Solomon’s new book, Facilitating with FINESSE, is now available on Amazon.com.

Filed Under: Articles, Communicating with FINESSE, Influence, on Systems Thinking Tagged With: Decision making, Facilitation

About JD Solomon

JD Solomon, PE, CRE, CMRP provides facilitation, business case evaluation, root cause analysis, and risk management. His roles as a senior leader in two Fortune 500 companies, as a town manager, and as chairman of a state regulatory board provide him with a first-hand perspective of how senior decision-makers think. His technical expertise in systems engineering and risk & uncertainty analysis using Monte Carlo simulation provides him practical perspectives on the strengths and limitations of advanced technical approaches.  In practice, JD works with front-line staff and executive leaders to create workable solutions for facilities, infrastructure, and business processes.

« Introduction to the ISO 31K Risk Management Framework
Physical Explosions: LNG Rapid Phase Transitions (RPT) »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headshot of JD SolomonArticles by JD Solomon
in the Communicating with FINESSE article series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Posts

  • Gremlins today
  • The Power of Vision in Leadership and Organizational Success
  • 3 Types of MTBF Stories
  • ALT: An in Depth Description
  • Project Email Economics

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy