Embracing Consent-Based Decision-Making: A Deeper Look

Embracing Consent-Based Decision-Making: A Deeper Look

In today’s rapidly evolving work environment, organizations are continually seeking innovative ways to facilitate collaborative decision-making. Consent-based decision-making stands at the forefront of these modern practices, owing to its effectiveness in promoting equality, efficiency, and innovation. Grounded in several key principles, this approach fosters a culture of active participation, mutual respect, empirical reasoning, and most importantly, it underscores the significance of consent.

Key Principles

What sets consent-based decision-making apart is an unerring devotion to several core tenets:
  • Ongoing Process: Here, decision-making is not a one-time event but a continuous, iterative dialogue where ideas are exchanged, and knowledge is iteratively co-created.
  • Stakeholder Rights: Every individual deserves a voice. They have the right to participate in decisions affecting them, and equal consideration is given to each idea.
  • Consent: Rather than pushing for unanimous approval, this process aims to create an environment where participants have no serious objection.
  • Empiricism: Observations and data influence decisions, supporting evidence-based consensus and continuous learning.
  • Continuous Improvement: Room for adaptation sites at this approach’s heart. Decisions are revisited and refined, paving the way for more effective outcomes.
  • Equivalence: A commitment to nimbleness and democracy, where everyone has an equal stake and voice in the process.
  • Transparency: Every member has access to necessary information, supporting informed, consensual decisions.
  • Accountability: Ownership and commitment go hand-in-hand, reinforcing the value of responsibility.


For consent-based decision-making and governance to function effectively, several preconditions are necessary:
  • Inclusion: The success of consent-based decision-making requires widespread participation and buy-in. Every participant should feel that their voice is fairly included and that participating in the process is worth their time.
  • Clear Understanding of Objection: Participants should understand that an ‘objection’ is not an issue with personal preferences but indicates an identifiable risk that the group cannot afford to take.
  • Understanding of the Decision-making Process: Participants should understand the difference between consent and consensus, and realize that decisions are “good enough for now, safe enough to try” instead of perfect.
  • Transparency: Each member should have access to the necessary information, upholding the principle of informed consent.
  • Willingness to Collaborate: The decision-making process can be challenging and time-consuming. The consent-based governance model relies on the willingness of all participants to collaborate and value the process of reaching the decision over the speed of making the decision.


Implementing Consent-based decision-making and governance can be a significant change for any organization or team. Therefore, it’s essential to follow a thoughtful, sequenced approach to its adoption. Here are the best practices for deployment:
  • Educate and Train: Explain the process, its principles, and benefits to the team. Give everyone a clear understanding of what it involves, why you’re adopting it, and how it will affect them. When all members understand the need for change and the principles behind it, they’re more likely to cooperate and contribute.
  • Start Small and Scale: Start with smaller decisions and smaller groups to avoid overwhelming the team. As individuals become comfortable with the idea and see its benefits, gradually expand its usage within the organization.
  • Embrace a ‘Safe to Try’ culture: Encourage a culture where decisions taken need to be ‘safe enough to try’, not ‘perfect’. This helps people become comfortable with the process and be more open to potential modifications.
  • Establish Communication Channels: Make sure everyone knows how information about decisions will be shared, where they can voice their objections or concerns, and provide avenues for dialogue.
  • Define What Constitutes an Objection: Clearly define what would be a valid objection. This helps avoid personal likes or dislikes from muddying decision-making and keeps everyone on the same page.
  • Use a Facilitator: Initially, it may be helpful to use a skilled facilitator to help guide the process, manage the flow of conversation, give everyone a chance to speak, and help the team work through any objections.
  • Regularly Reflect and Adapt: Just like any new process, it needs regular review and adjustment. Make regular retrospectives part of your routine where you reflect on how consent-based decision-making is working, what needs to be improved, and how to adjust the method to fit your team’s needs better.
Deploying consent-based decision-making and governance will greatly depend on the nature of your organization, team maturity, and culture. With the right buy-in and the right practices, it can promote effective, egalitarian decision-making and bring about transformative changes.

Consent vs. Consensus

While both consent and consensus hinge on collaboration, there are crucial differences that give the former an edge over the latter. Primarily, consent-based decision-making aims to reach “good enough for now, safe enough to try”, circumventing the paralysis that can result from seeking unanimous consensus.

Such an approach invites a diversity of voices, recognizing that objections are not necessarily impediments but opportunities for collective learning and choice refining. This effectively shortens the decision-making process and makes it more dynamic and resilient amidst productive disagreements.

Consent in Agile Teams

Agile teams are naturally fertile grounds for consent-based decision-making. Agile philosophies advocate for self-organization and collective commitment to outcomes. For Agile teams, consent contributes to a shared sense of responsibility and heightens alignment with shared project goals.

By empowering individuals to actively voice their opinions and objections without fear, teams can harness this diversity of thought to make more robust decisions and speedily navigate potential roadblocks.

Proof of Concept and Success Stories

Organizations across the globe are a testament to the success of consent-based decision-making.

One such example is the Dutch healthcare organization, Buurtzorg. Known for its self-managed teams, this nursing organization employed consent-based decision-making to remarkably increase nurse satisfaction, lower costs, and improve patient care quality.

Similarly, the global movement, Extinction Rebellion, structurally and decision-wise relies on consent decision-making, ensuring every view is heard and not ignored or suppressed.

Even major tech players like Zappos employ a version of consent-based decision-making within their holacracy model, shedding light on its dynamic adaptability across diverse fields and scales.


Consent-based decision-making is not just a method but a culture shift. By fostering an environment that invites objections, upholds transparency, and promotes shared responsibility, Agile teams and beyond can harness this approach’s full potential. Like all paradigm shifts, it takes adequate time, effort, and understanding for consent-based decision-making to flourish. However, once achieved, it opens doors to accelerated innovation, more comprehensive solutions, and ultimately, a more cohesive team.


  • Edwin Korver

    Edwin Korver is a polymath celebrated for his mastery of systems thinking and integral philosophy, particularly in intricate business transformations. His company, CROSS-SILO, embodies his unwavering belief in the interdependence of stakeholders and the pivotal role of value creation in fostering growth, complemented by the power of storytelling to convey that value. Edwin pioneered the RoundMap®, an all-encompassing business framework. He envisions a future where business harmonizes profit with compassion, common sense, and EQuitability, a vision he explores further in his forthcoming book, "Leading from the Whole."

Share the Post:

Recent Articles

Navigating Complexity: The Cynefin Framework and the Art of Adaptive Leadership

From Division to Unity: The Evolution of Community Design

Navigating the Future with the RoundMap’s Strategic Agility Matrix

Rise to the Occasion: Navigating Complexity with Strategic Agility and Foresight

Beyond Optimization: Embracing Transformation in the Digital Age

RoundMap’s Continuous Elevation Process: Cultivating Cyclical Growth

Beyond Ignoring Early Warnings: Exemplifying Adaptive Leadership in the Face of Disruption

Learning through Reflection: Adapting the Navy SEALs’ Mission Debriefing

Beyond the Bottom Line: Embracing Purpose for Sustainable Success

Embracing Complexity: From CAS to Whole-System Transformation

The Ultimate Dilemma: Reactive Crisis Management or Proactive Transformation for Future-Readiness?

Management Innovation: The Imperative for a Unified Approach to Systemic Change

Circuitry of Innovation: Bridging Organizational Silos for Collaborative Success

Embracing the Unknown: The Courage to Leap Towards a Future of Our Own Making

Adapting to Uncertainty: Embracing Agility in Building Future-Fit Organizations

Join Our Newsletter