Achieving Consensus With the
Group Writing Technique
by Nancy M. Johnson
One of the most difficult aspects of teamwork is achieving
consensus on written documents such as mission statements,
policies, procedures and manuals. The following presents an
effective method for arriving at a consensus in a
team environment.
In nearly every industry, the current work atmosphere includes teams. Cross-functional
work teams design products, solve problems and make improvements for their
customers every day. As they work together, team members contribute their
ideas, provide data and use quality methods to make decisions. Yet there
remains the pain of coming to consensus when detailed wording is important.
At some point, nearly every team faces a group writing effort of some kind:
writing a project mission statement, determining operational definitions
or articulating a recommendation. Ironically, that's when words can get
in the way.
Over the last few years, I have participated in a number of groups in which
consensus points rested on the group coming to terms with terms. The project
that forced me to think differently was a design project that required a
diverse group to create definitions for literally hundreds of terms. We
simply didn't have the time to horse-trade every word, but we still needed
to come to consensus on all those definitions.
In desperation, we experimented with a method we'll call the group writing
technique. We reached consensus on that mountain of definitions, everyone
had a say, and the work got done in record time.
Since that first effort, I have had several other occasions to use the
method and have found similar positive results. Recently, I had a chance
to use the technique with 11 participants faced with coming to consensus
on 19 terms. Using the technique, we completed the work in less than half
an hour.
The following is a step-by-step description of the group writing technique.
Try it the next time you need to come to closure on a number of items in
which detailed wording is important. Examples include writing definitions,
detailed procedures or specific recommendations.
Getting started
When a group is faced with writing definitions, try to have a dictionary
and thesaurus available for reference. It also helps to caution the group
not to use the term to define the term; that is an especially difficult
task when dealing with common terms.
For example, our group was working at defining our tax strategy and found
that "fees due to governments" was too clumsy, so we broke the
rule and incorporated the word "tax" into the definition. The
draft definition was: "Making choices so as to minimize the corporate
fees due to governments and paid by the company," and the consensus
definition was: "Making choices so as to pay the minimum tax allowed
while achieving our objectives." The idea is not only to agree on wording
but also to make sure that the definitions remain clear and useful.
When a group works at detailed wording for a mission statement, procedures
or recommendations, it may be useful to identify a set of criteria. Using
a round robin technique, collect criteria on a flip chart and post the list
as a checklist of what to include.
The steps
Begin by identifying each term or statement that needs
to be defined. Write each item at the top of a single 8 1/2" x 11"
page-only one item per page.
"Deal" the pages to the committee
members. Committee members will work simultaneously on different items.
Each committee member writes a draft statement
for the items he or she has been "dealt." An alternative is to
have the group leader or a volunteer write the draft statements ahead of
time. That first draft is the most difficult, so a set of suggested items
will really jump-start the group.
Silently, committee members review each item
in turn. In the review process, committee members may want to refer to their
criteria checklist or to the dictionary and thesaurus at hand.
If the committee member can live with-and
support-the statement as is, the member writes his or her initials immediately
under the statement and passes it to the person on the right. This starts
a "column" of initials of consensus on an item.
The committee member may also make changes.
To refine the recommendation, simply make changes and start a new column
of initials for the revised definition. To rewrite the item entirely, draw
a line below the work to that point and rewrite. Then pass the new statement
to the committee member on the right, who goes through the same review process:
either initial or refine. Ironically, the most comprehensive definitions
are the briefest. If committee members find that the definitions get too
long, try a "less is more" approach and shorten.
An initial means "I can live with this
and support it."
The process continues until each item has
the I-can-live-with-it-and-support-it initials from every committee member.
Note that the starting point changes whenever
there is a change in the statement. Initialing in "columns" helps
to keep track of the developing consensus.
Consensus is reached when each committee member
has initialed each item.
An example
The following is an example of one definition reviewed by committee. The
first draft, done in advance, was: "Making choices so as to minimize
the corporate fees due to governments and paid by the company." Three
committee members expressed that they could live with it and support it
by initialing the draft. When the draft reached the fourth member, that
person crossed out the end of the definition, wrote a new suggestion and
started a new column of initials. The entire committee expressed agreement
with the revision by initialing. While this definition was being reviewed,
18 other items similarly made the rounds.
The benefits
When working on wording, teams will notice a number of advantages with
the group writing technique. First, it allows the group to deal with many
items simultaneously. Second, it maximizes participation from all members.
Third, it avoids endless discussions over shades of meaning; to suggest
a change, the committee member simply writes it. Fourth, it saves a lot
of committee time on difficult issues. Finally, the process is easy to learn;
a minute or two of instruction is all teams need. In short, the group writing
technique provides one way to shortcut the word wars without compromising
on quality.
About the author . . .
Nancy M. Johnson is vice president, corporate research, for American
Family Insurance in Madison, Wisconsin, a multiple-line insurance company
offering more than 100 products to rural and urban customers. Johnson is
responsible for introducing strategies that give American Family competitive
advantage and, at the same time, build on the company's successful tradition.
The corporate research division is responsible for the strategic research
function, the organization's quality effort and strategic planning.
While at American Family, Johnson has also held positions in marketing
and human resources. Prior to joining the company, she taught at the University
of California at Davis. She has written a number of articles on management
and consumer research issues, and is a frequent speaker at industry and
business conferences. qd