Proper guidelines for the use of this option, however, are important.
The ethics of consensus decision-making encourage participants to place the good of the whole group above their own individual preferences.
Sometimes the vote on a proposal is framed, “Is this proposal something you can live with?
” This relaxed threshold for a yes vote can achieve full consent.
The Condorcet consensus does not require unanimous or near-unanimous consensus - which cannot be realistically reached in big group sizes - but maximizes satisfaction rate.
It can also be argued that when a Condorcet consensus is reached, further deliberation will only strengthen and further specify this consensus.
These dynamics may harm group member relationships and undermine the ability of a group to cooperatively implement a contentious decision.
Consensus decision-making attempts to address the beliefs of such problems.
An objection is a reason why doing what is proposed stands in the way of satisfying needs or goals, which the proposal aims to satisfy.
Giving consent does not necessarily mean that the proposal being considered is one’s first choice.
Group members can vote their consent to a proposal because they choose to cooperate with the direction of the group, rather than insist on their personal preference.
Proponents claim that outcomes of the consensus process include: In groups that require unanimous agreement or consent (unanimity) to approve group decisions, if any participant objects, they can block consensus according to the guidelines described below.
These groups use the term consensus to denote both the discussion process and the decision rule.