An important aspect of my job involves engagement in cross-functional initiatives, spanning diverse teams and domains. Over the past few years, I’ve embraced a strategic shift - shy away from the pursuit of consensus. Rather than striving for unanimous agreement, my approach centers on crafting solutions with minimized opposition.
In the world of cross-functional projects, the pursuit of consensus can sometimes lead us down the path of decision paralysis. Instead of seeking unanimous agreement, I’ve found success in fostering a culture where diverse perspectives contribute to solutions with fewer roadblocks.
Benefits of Diverse Decision-Making
- Adaptability: Embracing varied viewpoints ensures our solutions are robust and adaptable to change.
- Innovation: Different minds bring fresh ideas, sparking innovation that propels projects forward.
- Efficiency: By focusing on minimizing objections rather than achieving full consensus, we avoid the pitfalls of decision stagnation.
The Consensus Trap
Striving for consensus can inadvertently stall progress. The more voices involved, the harder it is to find complete agreement. This delay can hinder project timelines and impact overall success.
Seeking Input, Not Unanimity
Instead of waiting for everyone to be on the same page, I’ve learned to gather input from diverse sources. This approach streamlines decision-making, leading to more dynamic and timely project outcomes.
What’s your experience with decision-making in cross-functional projects?