Karen: 0:08

Welcome to Employing Differences, the conversation about exploring the collaborative space between individuals.

Paul: 0:15

I'm Paul Tevis.

Karen: 0:17

And I'm Karen Gimnig.

Paul: 0:20

Each episode we start with a question and we see where it takes us. This week's question is, "How do we find Options C?"

Karen: 0:27

So this is a reference to a story I tell folks about why consensus. Why would you want to use a consensus process when majority vote is so efficient. We're familiar with it and we're used to it, why would we go to consensus? And what I tell folks is, in the simplest case, we're starting with two options. We've got Option A, and we've got Option B, and in a majority vote, what we end up with is one of those either Option A or Option B and some winners and some losers. And neither the winners nor the losers actually are feeling particularly connected and engaged and happy with the whole group dynamic at that point. If we instead make that same decision by consensus, we start with the same two options Option A and Option B and almost always, what we end up with is some other option(that we're calling Option C) and broad buy-in of the whole community, to some extent. It may not be everyone's favorite thing, but that everyone feels comfortable, like this is a reasonable way to move forward as a community. And that is the beauty of consensus is that you get that other option, Option C into the mix. So the question for today is, how do we do that? What actually are the mechanisms that get us from we walked into the room, we've got these two options, we knew we have these two options, what brings us to figuring out what a different option might be.

Paul: 2:00

So I love words, and sometimes have strong feelings about what words do and should mean. But one of those is"consensus." And this is something that I talk about, and I don't remember if you and I have actually talked about this together, Karen, or not. But one of the things that I point out to people is that "consensus" comes from the Latin verb, meaning "to think or feel together." That we are sensing together. And so a lot of people talk about consensus as an outcome when really what they're talking about is this is a level of agreement that you've gotten to. Whereas I tend to emphasize consensus as a process, that we have a consensus-based process where we are thinking and feeling together. And for me, it is that process of mutual exploration of "Why I love option B, and why you love option A, and what is true about each of us and where we're at, and what's going on in the community, and what's going on in the world, what's going on in our situations" that it's in the mutual exploration of that, of the sensing and the thinking and the feeling together, that new options start to emerge. That it's not just about talking about the merits of each individual thing, but how we even came to think that that thing was a good idea in the first place. So for me, how we find Option C, is by doing

exactly that: 3:26

By sharing, by talking about what it is that we find appealing about this thing. What is it if I'm a supporter of option B what do I not like about option B? What do I think some of the drawbacks of it are? And just sort of laying all that out, rather than moving to make a decision quickly. Actually exploring what we know about ourselves and our situation through the lens of these different options. So that's where I start from.

Karen: 3:58

Absolutely, I'm right with you. And I think that one of the things we don't realize as a piece of that is that when I arrive in the room, and I'm ready for a majority vote, I'm going to check my box, I know I like Option A and I'm going to take the opposite one from yours just for the fun of this conversation I want Option A and I know it, it turns out I probably don't actually know all of why. I probably haven't myself really thought through in detail, "What is it about this that's so appealing to me." There's a fair chance that I looked at the options and I went, "Option A," or maybe I thought about a couple of things, but I landed on Option A. And then because I've grown up in a competitive society, my

brain starts churning: 4:42

How are all the ways that I can defend and support my viewpoint of Option A? Ahat are all the things that I can say to validate that choice as the best choice, and making the arguments to win the argument. If we enter into a consensus process, one of the things that helps us find Option C is actually for me to get really curious about what I'm liking about Option A. What is it that's driving me about it? And maybe it's that there's some that I don't like about Option B. Maybe that's why? And if I have the discipline to do what you were suggesting, Paul, of now let me look at the flip side, "What is not so good?" What's not on that list of "I'm making the case" arguments, but is on the list of factors that should be considered and what comes up. So a good consensus process, one of the first things you're going to do in my opinion is slow down. You might get into pair situation and just really listen to each other. You might use some mirroring, of really exploring, what is it about this that is important to me? What are the factors that are leading me to feel so strongly? Or am I feeling strongly? Did I pick one and just start defending it out of habit, when actually, I don't actually care that much. What is going on in me about this decision? And I think that's really the first thing that often begins to have other things show up around it.

Paul: 6:08

The piece about sort of defending our positions is, I think, a huge one that we completely overlook. I think behavioral economics actually talks a fair bit about this and what we know about the brain in terms of how we are in most situations are not actually rational decision makers, that we latch on to a thing, and then we engage in what's called motivated reasoning, which is where we are really good at coming up with reasons why our position is right, even though those aren't actually the reasons we picked them. And we do this unconsciously. And so I think there's a lot going on there that as you said, we aren't even aware of that sort of leads to this. And I think one of the things that we often aren't aware of is that there even could be an Option C. It is that the real challenge of seeing Option A and Option B is thinking that that's all of the options that there are, that there aren't any other ones. So of course we view them relative to each other. And so part of that, I think, the "How do we get to Option C?" is just ask people to come up with them. Start to do some brainstorming. After we do that initial exploration of maybe we have Option A and Option B, start to go, "Well, what else might there be? What else could we do?"The line that I come back to a ton from Virginia Satir who said,"One option is a trap. Two is a dilemma. Three is where real choice begins." When we feel like we only have two choices, we're in a dilemma. We have to pick A or B. And if we can get out of that by just starting to go, "Well, what's Option C?" Option D, and Option E, and Option F are usually pretty close behind that one, because we expand out of that thinking really quickly.

Karen: 8:02

Yeah. I think that we also get there because if we've explored why I am attached to Option A, or why I'm opposed to Option B what we've done is gotten closer to our values. So I really like Option A because it would result in this and this and this. So as we're looking for Option C okay, so what we wanted wasn't really a bookshelf in this particular place in this particular room, really what we wanted was a place we could store the books where everybody would have access to them, and it would be easy to come and go. So we got to kind of what were the criteria, or what were the values behind what we're trying to do. Okay, so what are other ways that we could have a place to store the books that everybody would have access to them? So we're starting with what we learned about what we actually want, what we're actually trying to accomplish what we value? And from that, looking for that Option C, D, E?

Paul: 8:58

It's funny, because I feel like this is the flip side of the episode we did a few weeks back, which was the "Why not both?" Here's one place where we are actually starting to explore how can you do both effectively, which is, well, what's really under that? There's a tool that I sometimes use with groups, when we're working with what really appears to be a trade off. So a classic example that this comes up with in a lot of corporate work is autonomy and alignment. We want our teams to

be autonomous: 9:32

We want them to be able to sort of run and do what it is that they're able to do, so that they don't have this overheads, so they're empowered to make good decisions. And we also want them to be aligned. We don't want them all going in different directions. We don't want them stepping on each other's toes. And so that can feel like a conflict, where it' like "Well, we either have o pick the org structure that s going to align them, so t at they're all standard w th standardized work." And we all know how this works. Or we re gonna pick this org struct re that's just chaos, where hey're fully empowered, an they can do whatever they wan. And what we'll often do when w feel like that's our Options A and B, one of the lenses into Option C, is we'll say, " reat, I want you to make a l st of all the things we could d that would give the teams auton my." And then we have anothe group that's coming up all he things you could do that woul create alignment. Then we loo for things that show up on both lists. Where is the intersec ion between those two values? That actually get us both in both alignment and autonom. And so just starting to eve think about where is there o erlap between solutions, betwee strategies for getting tho e sorts of things where we c n get both? And I think that s where a lot of that those Op ions C can come from.

Karen: 10:51

I want to take us on one other path with this and consensus conversation, I think is really important, which is to get out of cognitive. We tend to, when we're defending our positions, we list lots of logical, factual kinds of reasons. And as you were pointing out earlier, we don't actually make decisions that way. We mostly make decisions in the emotional realm. So I think it can be useful in a group, when we're trying to think and feel together, that we pause and say, "Let's especially feel for right now." So let's set aside anything factual. Maybe there's a little bit of a guided meditation piece here, a little bit of a centering something that sort of settles everybody down and feel into, really key into what are you feeling in your body? What are you feeling emotionally? What's coming up for you in that emotional realm about A? What's coming up for you in the emotional realm about B? And what does that teach you about where you're coming from? That sometimes sort of disrupting the flow of reason, after reason, after reason, and getting into, "This just feels wrong," or, "This triggers me for this reason," or whatever. Following that feeling realm will often break open the blocks around A and B, and reveal an Option C.

Paul: 12:17

And the other thing that that often reveals is what we're feeling about the process. Not just the options. Oftentimes, when we get into that we've Option A or Option B sort of thing. It's just like, "I am so tired of this. I'm tired of people arguing and sniping, and I'm just gonna vote for one. Fine, fine, you've worn me down. I'll change my position, so we've got enough votes, so we can just move on and be done." And I find it is rarely a good decision that comes from the"Fine, let's just move on and be done." As you said, we absolutely at that point, end up with A or B and winners and losers, and nobody feeling particularly good about the process. So I think, noticing when our feeling about how the process is going is actually preventing us from getting to Option C. Because it is a choice to say, "Let's spend some more time here, this isn't gonna be a fast decision, we need to get sort of deeper into it." Some people just, they're done at that point. But I think that if we reflect on how we are feeling about the process, that can actually clue us into how we want the process to be different. And often that mutual exploration of difference of what we actually want or need out of this feels very different than the battling over A and B. And so I think people are actually open to move into that space, if they can recognize how it will be different if they're fed up with with the way that the current process feels.

Karen: 13:53

Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. So sort of tracking where we started, how do we find Option C? Of we're starting with A and B, what's the process that we go through? And we're really looking at getting clear within ourselves what's what's going on in me about this and what's coming up, slowing it down a little bit, getting to kind of values and then looking at, okay, so I thought I wanted Option A, what's not good about that? So really trying to look deeply at all the reasons and being aware of our tendency to just line up our advocacy for the one that we want, sort of set that aside. So really listening into each other around all the sides of it, where the values are actively asking, What is an Option C here? So if these are the values we're trying to get to, if these are the things we'd like to accomplish, what are other ways to accomplish them? For what are ways to accomplish A, what are ways to accomplish B, and where is that crossover with those? And then lastly, to slow down and ask ourselves how we're feeling, so that we're not just thinking together, we're also feeling together. And what does that reveal about both the content the thing we're trying to figure out and also the process that we're using for trying to get there.

Paul: 15:14

Well, that's gonna do it for us for today. Until next time, I'm Paul Tevis.

Karen: 15:18

And I'm Karen Gimnig, and this has been Employing Differences.