As you saw in Chapter 8, the best decisions are usually those that have come from productive conflict (Kuhn & Poole, 2000; Nicotera, 1997). When group members deal with conflict productively, they ask clarifying questions, respectfully challenge one another’s ideas, consider worst-case scenarios, and revise proposals as needed to reflect new information and insights. This process leads to sound decisions because it enables group members to generate the widest possible range of ideas as well as test each idea’s pros and cons. An idea that survives this rigorous process has a better chance of succeeding in action.

The other advantage of productive conflict is that the group members who have a hand in exploring and arriving at a decision will feel a greater sense of ownership over the decision, which leads to greater commitment. Thus, decisions made through productive conflict have a greater chance of being implemented. That’s a good thing, since even the most brilliant decision is useless unless a group puts it into action.

For this reason, making decisions by consensus—group solidarity in sentiment, belief, or decision—is often a better approach than making decisions by majority vote. According to the consensus approach, everyone must agree on the final decision before it can be implemented. It takes more time than deciding by majority vote, but it can be a powerful way to enhance feelings of ownership and commitment from group members. One caution, however, is to be careful to encourage genuine consensus, rather than allowing group members to silence their opposition in order to preserve group harmony!