How do you want to decide in a team? This is a crucial question, and a self-directing team that operates at eye level needs a good answer. You need a way to come to smart decisions quickly and effectively, even though everyone has a say. This problem is well known, and over the course of time various approaches have emerged, sometimes working better and sometimes worse. At some point, four Austrians developed Systemic Consensing (the SK Principle), which has the power to accomplish a great deal. In recognition of this great technique, we adopted it for NVC-plus and were able to favorably accentuate the method, based on the advantages and possibilities that NVC- plus offers us. Thus we have the answer how modern NVC-plus teams can decide very well. However, as with all NVC-plus elements, each team is free to use consensus decision-making or to reach for tools that work better for them.

Consensus cards for printing can be found in the NVC-plus Shop.

NVC-plus Abstimmungskarten zum Ausdrucken bekommst du hier:

Consensing is about making the best decision in groups, teams and communities, or developing it further in the decision-making process. The process begins with a search for proposed solutions. The proposal that generates the least rejection in the group wins - i.e. not the proposal with the most YES's, nor the proposal with the fewest NO's (YES-NO duality), but the proposal with the lowest scaled collective NO.

Thus, for each individual solution, the extent of the group's total resistance is determined. The proposal with the least resistance succeeds.

Advantages • Quick decision • Involves everyone • Creative solution finding • Even reserved people can participate well Procedure • How do we proceed? • Card poll, with an app, a tool, anonymous, who writes down, moderates, totals? How many rounds do people want to vote? (2, 3, 4?) • Does everyone have a good understanding of how consensus voting works? (Test run with innocuous question) 1 . What exactly is the problem - formulated as a question This question should not be answerable with yes or no (so do not formulate a decision question!) 2 . What are the proposed solutions? As in brainstorming, the proposals are not criticized 3 . How much resistance does each proposal generate and with whom? Each solution proposal is evaluated by everyone with resistance points. Zero points = 0 resistance or no problem with the solution. 5 (or 10 if you like) points = total resistance or you don't support this solution. 4 . Which solution has the least resistance? You add up the resistance points for each solution and compare the results. 5 . All can reject, adapt, extend or leave their solution as it is. They can discuss what the resistance is based on in order to improve the proposed solution or to present it more clearly. Then a second and possibly a third round begins. In these rounds, the proposed solutions mature quickly and adapt optimally to the group.

For NVC-plus consesning, you don't look for different solutions for a problem to consense them, as it is common in classical consensing. Instead, you define the problem and consider what parameters all solutions would need to meet in order for the solution to be a solution. For example, if we are looking for a restaurant for lunch, then that restaurant would have to: • be open at noon • be accessible within 10 minutes • offer something vegetarian too. So the problem is only seen as a framework for different personal utopias/visions. These are sought for NVC-plus consensing, listed and then consensualized as usual. In the process, the utopias/visions mature and partly combine with other utopias/visions. The advantage of this is that not only a pure problem solution is created, but also a positive vital current in the team.