Where not to use?

Figure 2. Time required for difference decision making styles and relationship to employee commitment and ownership (from LM Miller)

A balance is required to employ consultative decision making in a business environment (or in any organization). If used inappropriately, consultative decision making can lead to ineffective use of time. If a group uses consultation on important and routine matters alike, the time spent discussing an issue needs to be considered like an “opportunity cost” for the group. Groups do not have unlimited energy and time. The time and energy spent in consultation needs to be focused on those matters that are of priority, and where unity, creativity and common vision are desired. Where to use consultation, and where to use other decision making methodologies, can itself be a subject of consultation—but needs to be addressed. Using consultative decision making effectively implies the use of other decision making methods and delegation where appropriate.

Consultative decision making is based on the condition that there is sufficient group solidarity that they are ready to work for one decision that is acceptable for all. A study on consensus decision making undertaken at Cornell University’s Johnson Graduate School of Management illustrates what happens if this condition is not met. A “confederate” participated in decision making groups, who insisted on decisions that were fundamentally different from those embraced by other members. When the maverick brought the group to a stalemate, members' satisfaction with the decision-making process declined significantly, even though every member was given full voice in the proceedings.  The study concluded that consensus decision-making has its place, since it results in greater satisfaction and acceptance among group members. But it doesn't work when members have fundamental differences. Another EBBF publication on consultation cites case studies where some staff changes were required before the benefits of consultative decision making could be realized ¹.

The size of a consultative group needs also to be considered. Groups of 10 or fewer are common. As the size of the group grows, the more difficult it becomes to manage time, differing opinions, and fully capture the individual inputs into the creative process. Larger groups are possible if the participants are skilled in using this methodology and are conscious of the limitations of time.

Methodologies exist that utilize the essential elements of consultative decision making but are adapted for larger groups. For example, the World Bank has published guidelines about ‘action planning workshops’ that emphasize active participation, collective responsibility and a dynamic process. The benefits cited for such an approach clearly reflect the same benefits that are obtained from consultative decision making, including: “the articulation of a clear and mutually agreed understanding of a problem, strategy, or programme; building a stronger team with more internal consensus; establishing commitment and ownership within a local agency to a selected approach or an agreed plan; and strengthening skills and understanding among agency staff.” A competent and experienced facilitator is a pre-requisite to manage this process in larger groups.