The Hidden Dangers of 'Reaching a Consensus'

"In a direction everyone thinks is good."
"Let's find a middle ground that everyone can agree on."
At first glance, these words sound like an ideal and peaceful way to build consensus.
But in reality, isn't this "plan that everyone agrees on" actually a structural trap that kills innovation?

First, I want to consider the question: "Does a 'plan that everyone agrees on' actually exist?"

In reality...

• A plan that is too novel → scary

• A plan that is too conservative → boring

• A plan that doesn't hurt anyone's feelings → half-baked

Caught in this trilemma, what ultimately gets chosen is a plan that is simply 'safe for everyone'. In other words, "everyone's consensus" becomes a euphemism for stopping one's thinking.

Furthermore, this structure creates decision-making without a leader.

A middle-ground plan that no one takes responsibility for and that belongs to no one is passed. Just so that no one can be blamed if it doesn't produce results.

—In this way, an escape route of "it can't be helped because we all decided it" is mass-produced. This is not "shared consensus," but "diffusion of responsibility."

Structurally speaking, a "culture that prioritizes consensus" has the following characteristics.

It is easy to "exclude" opinions that feel off, people read the room too much, and dialogue fails to materialize. Furthermore, avoiding conflict is prioritized over making decisions.

As a result, "conclusions that hurt no one but excite no one" continue to be born.

So, how can we change this structure?

Try using "hypotheses and experiments" as the standard instead of "consensus." And create a culture that allows for "plans we'll just try out for now."
If possible, it is also good to clarify the roles of the "person who decides" and the "person who follows up."

In the first place, by the time everyone is 100% in agreement, it might already be outdated.

Actually, what is important is not consensus, but 'the flexibility to adjust while moving forward'.

A "plan that everyone agrees on" might be a compromise born from someone having to endure it. Or, it might be a graveyard for the "true feelings" that no one dared to voice.

Even so, do you still aim for "everyone's consensus"?

This kind of thing wasn't written in the textbooks, was it.

The previous #NotWrittenInTextbooks series was...

Ending theme "Not Written in Textbooks"