We need to agree on processes of decision making internally to setup/change collective expectations. I propose Integrative Decision Making (IDM) process.
IDM is developed for self-organized environment but optimized for speed & efficiency. The core principle is consent (nobody objects), instead of consensus (all support) for setting expectations
Expectations can take forms of a) policy – rule that limits freedom in specific situations (don’t litter) b) roles accountabilities – to do prescriptions for a person holding this roles (secretary does meeting minutes) and c) domains – objects under control of some role (domain “funds” for directorship, domain “website” for communications etc).
Anybody can raise an expectations setup/change on the group meetings, with the IDM routine processed by the facilitator by the next steps:
Present Proposal — proposer describes the problem that she saw and the solution she proposes
Clarifying Questions — anyone can ask clarifying questions. Proposer can answer. No reactions or dialog allowed.
Reaction Round — each person can react to the proposal as they see fit. No discussion or responses.
Amend & Clarify — proposer can optionally clarify the intent or amend the proposal based on reactions. No discussion allowed.
Objection Round — The Facilitator asks each person in turn: ”Do you see any reasons why adopting this proposal would cause harm or move us backwards?” (an “Objection”). Objections are stated, tested, and captured without discussion; the proposal is adopted if none surface.
Integration — The goal is to craft an amended proposal that would not cause the Objection, but that would still address the proposer’s problem. Focus on each Objection, one at a time. Once all are integrated, go through another Objection Round.
If the proposal passes secretary should move the decision to the “Roles & Policies” doc, from meeting minutes.
Expectation not set in “Roles & Policies” doc are not valid.