MODULE III - Decision Making

MODULE III - Decision Making

OBJECTIVES:

  • To examine group dynamics in a decision making process.
  • To identify and examine the various types of decision making processes.

Again, at the September 2008 Workshops on Conflict within Locals, participants also identified the decision making process as another irritant to in-fighting within Locals.  While some Local By-Laws provide for some very limited rules and guidelines on the decision making process within Locals, this matter is largely not addressed.

Now that we have discussed the duties and responsibilities for each of the Executive Officer positions, we have learned that by assigning specific responsibilities to each position, we have implied significant decision making authority to the incumbents of these positions.  For the most part, however, these officers are still accountable to the Local Executive or to the general membership, who ultimately has the authority to accept, reject or modify the position taken by or decision made by the individual Officer.  Moreover, often By-Laws and terms of references are silent, conferring ambiguous and unclear decision making authority upon the President or one of the other Officers.  When the decision being made is not popular with all of the other Officers or the membership, there is no wonder why we have as much conflict in some Locals.  As a result, we need to assign significant deliberation as to how we arrive at decisions and to whom decision making authority is granted.  This deliberation should include, but not be limited to what our Local By-Laws say on the matter. 

One must remember that it is not just the decision itself that will affect the outcome, but the decision making process itself may contribute significantly to the success or lack of success of the issue.  Being a democratic union, we have relied on the democratic system of majority vote to decide our issues in most cases.  But is this the most effective way to deal with a matter?  It may very well be argued that it is the most time effective way to deal with a matter, but is it the best way to achieve buy-in by all. 

Consequently, studies show that the consensus model is arguably the most desirable process in resolving issues while maximizing team collaboration, cooperativeness and ownership.

Consensus decision making is not always an easy process to achieve, however. Hierarchies, personal agendas, political positions and personalities must be set aside to reach a true consensus.  Consensus is also built on the foundation of fairness, honesty and transparency.  It may be said that consensus has been achieved, not only when a decision has been reached, but also when all group decision makers can favorably state that they feel that their opinion has been understood and considered, that they have understood and considered the opinions of the others, that they believe that all information has been shared openly, fairly and transparently and that they can take ownership of the group decision and support said decision.

From time to time, however consensus may not be possible within restricted time frames in which a decision must be made.  In those cases, the group should decide, what process should be used to decide the matter.  In exceptional cases, we may have to go back to our normal manner of deciding matters – the majority vote.

Regardless of the process used, a good leader will ensure that all points of view are heard and input is meaningfully solicited.  This is but one characteristic of an effective leadership style that we will examine in the next module.