Too many bosses
In a previous company, we had an elderly colleague, Johan. He was the oldest in the company. His job was to go through all the rooms and the labs and certify the power cables for their security. He was everywhere and of course, picked up a lot of discussions.
Once, while we were waiting for the devices in the lab to restart, Johan told me, shaking his head, “On your floor, you have too many bosses.” I thought he’s right. We worked with a SCRUM-like structure so everybody could take a decision. I took his comment as a compliment. As I remembered though the last time we had to make a decision, I could understand his pitty looking face implying “you poor guys, you have too many bosses”.

The worst thing

What I remembered was this: We needed to rebase our backend architecture and met to decide the new way. We were 15 software developers in the room. We disagreed during the whole meeting and everybody had their rights with their concerns. At the end of the meeting we hadn’t taken any decision. We met again and once more and the no-decision-pattern was repeated. Finally, nobody wanted to meet again. Over a year we had kept the old architecture because we couldn’t make the decision about what to change, so we didn’t change anything.
Theodore Roosevelt said, “In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.” We did the worst thing and I strongly believe it’s not only us.

Think of any time you need to decide about something, even a simple thing like buying a new pair of trousers. You think of all the odds to fail. Does it fit well, does it worth the money, does the color matches other clothes I have? Some people give it a try, some others are overwhelmed and leave the store without buying anything.

Think of experiences, not of success and failure

When we do nothing, what we try to avoid is a failure. We need success. But what do success and failure mean? We just make experiences. There are experiences bringing more of the expected outcome and others less. If you say “Let’s make a new experience and search for the decision with the lower negative impact”, it’s different than saying “Let’s search for the decision that will bring success”. The last statement increases the stress level of the people while the first brings the team in a mode to evaluate the negative impacts.
The discussion and evaluation of the pros and cons are risk analysis and it is important how to moderate it. When the feelings from the disagreement are strong, a discussion, based on priorities, comparisons and numbers, brings the people back from the emotional to the rational level. At this moment the colleagues are open to compromise and try a new way.

Consensus – Majority or Monarch

Assuming now you’ve moderated the risk analysis and you’ve arrived at the point to make a decision. Will you use consensus? It will take ages if ever you arrive at a consensus. Will you use the majority rule? Some people will be totally disappointed and could go to apathy mode. Will you designate somebody as a “monarch” to decide for the team? Who? That’s again a decision. Every way has its drawbacks but consensus can be the most accepted solution.

Minority is included
A very good example of searching consensus is the film with Henry Fonda “12 Angry Men” (1957). However, it can often be that a consensus is not possible at that moment. How do you continue? I find the following hybrid model as a good compromise. After discussion and first voting, we let the minority express their concerns and vote again. If somebody changes their minds and joins the minority, they explain why they did so and we discuss their arguments. We vote again. This can be repeated until nobody changes sides anymore. At this point, we decide with the majority rule. If you have the chance to define a trial period and then reevaluate the solution is even better.

If we want to avoid the monarch we choose the difficult way of taking a decision as a team. We can make this way easier though if we consider those three things. Think of new experiences instead of successes and failures. Moderate risk analysis in a rational way. Take care of the concerns of the minority after voting. This way takes more time for reaching a decision but it has more chances to be accepted and bring a change.