I am checking out this Sociocracy thing for making decisions in groups. Sounds interesting, with everyone agreeing instead of just voting. But I’m curious how to make it work smoothly in real life.
Here’s what I am wondering:
In Sociocracy, people agree instead of just voting yea or nay. How does this work without taking forever? How do you make sure everyone gets a say but still reach a decision?
Are there any special tricks to running these Sociocracy meetings? How do you keep things on track and make sure everyone feels heard, even if they disagree at first?
Dealing with Disagreements: Sociocracy says disagreements are good for making better decisions. But how do you handle them without getting stuck or someone feeling shut down?
How does this Sociocracy stuff fit in with the everyday running of an organization? Is there a good way to connect decisions made by different groups?
Any books, websites, or classes you recommend to learn more about running Sociocracy meetings?
In Sociocracy, people agree instead of just voting yea or nay. How does this work without taking forever? How do you make sure everyone gets a say but still reach a decision?
Everyone gets a say because we speak in rounds, one person at a time, until everyone has spoken.
When making a decision, there are three main steps: understand, explore, decide.
If there is already a proposal ready (that is, you don’t need to co-create a proposal), the first step is to ensure that all members of the circle understand what is being decided. To make sure, we do a round for clarifying questions, “Is there anything you need to know to understand the proposal?” Some facilitators collect all the questions and then have someone answer them, some have the questions answered as they come up. Either way, everyone should understand what is being proposed by the end of this process.
Next we do a round of quick reactions. This is to explore how each member of the circle feels about the proposal. Do they fully support it? Do they have some concerns? At this point, members are just expressing their thoughts, not objecting to the proposal.
Next comes the consent round, the decision. Each member of the circle will consider if the proposal is within their range of tolerance and consent or object accordingly. Ideally, an objection will be tied to the circle’s aims: if we consent to this proposal, we will not be able to achieve our aims because . That is the kind of objection that is a gift to the circle because it gives an opportunity to improve the proposal. Are there any special tricks to running these Sociocracy meetings? How do you keep things on track and make sure everyone feels heard, even if they disagree at first?
See answer above. Dealing with Disagreements: Sociocracy says disagreements are good for making better decisions. But how do you handle them without getting stuck or someone feeling shut down?
Integrating objections will usually improve a proposal. There are a few useful strategies for integrating objections using the following steps:
Understand the objection (the facilitator may need to ask some questions, or they may ask for a round of clarifying questions)
Explore the options, such as
Shorten the term of the proposal (maybe it’s safe enough to try for a short time to test if it’s good)
Modify the proposal in some other way
Measure the concern (include some specific measurement strategies in the proposal)
Decide - restate the proposal with any modifications and try for consent again. How does this Sociocracy stuff fit in with the everyday running of an organization? Is there a good way to connect decisions made by different groups?
This article is a little long, but gives a good overview of how circles in sociocracy work independently (distributed authority) and interdependently (double linking between circles) so that decisions made by different circles are part of the whole Any books, websites, or classes you recommend to learn more about running Sociocracy meetings?
