Decision Making PBL
Governance Guild Decision making PBL
Proposal: https://cardano.ideascale.com/c/idea/64343
Decision Making PBL flow and script by Nori Nishigaya
Chapter 1: Onboarding and Introduction to Decision Making
Welcome to the first chapter of the Governance Guild curriculum! In this chapter, we aim to provide you with a solid understanding of the fundamentals of decision-making. We'll start by introducing the course and its objectives, followed by an exploration of decision-making in decentralized spaces. We'll also discuss the importance of good decision-making and provide examples of both successful and unsuccessful decision-making in various contexts.
Add: Video of one of us welcoming people to the course to give it a human face right up front.
Discussion: Go to the course forum and introduce yourself. Why are you interested in this course? What do you hope to get out of it? What groups and communities do you represent?
Section 1.1: Intro to Decision-Making Content
Decision-making is a crucial aspect of any organization or community, as it directly influences the actions taken, resource allocation, and the overall direction of the group.
During this course, you'll learn about various decision-making systems and their applications, strengths, and weaknesses. You'll also explore the importance of good decision-making and its impact on the success or failure of a group. Moreover, you'll have the opportunity to experiment with different decision-making styles within your own group and share your experiences with others.
As you progress through the course, we encourage you to actively participate in discussions, share your thoughts, and collaborate with your peers. This will not only enhance your understanding of the concepts but also contribute to the ongoing development of the course materials.
In the next section, we'll provide an orientation to the course, including the syllabus, objectives, and other essential information to help you get started on your decision-making journey.
Section 1.2: Getting Started / Orientation
Welcome to Section 1.2 of the Governance Guild curriculum! In this section, we'll help you get oriented with the course and provide essential information to set you up for success throughout your decision-making journey.
The course is divided into four chapters:
Onboarding and Introduction to Decision Making
Exploring Different Forms of Decision Making
Deep Dives into Specific Decision-Making Systems
Contributing to the Governance Guild Curriculum
Each chapter contains several sections designed to provide you with comprehensive knowledge, resources, and opportunities to practice different decision-making styles. Our goal is to equip you with the necessary guidance and suggestion to improve decision-making processes within your group or organization, ultimately leading to more effective outcomes.
Throughout the course, you'll find reading materials, videos, and other resources that supplement the learning experience. We recommend dedicating sufficient time to engage with these materials, as they will deepen your understanding of the concepts covered in each section.
In the next section, we'll delve into the world of decision-making in decentralized spaces, exploring the unique challenges and opportunities that arise in these environments.
Add:
Preparations for the course (add from pedagogic perspective)
Section 1.3: Decision Making in Decentralized Spaces
Decentralized spaces present unique challenges and opportunities when it comes to decision-making. In contrast to centralized systems, where decision-making authority is concentrated in a single individual or a small group of individuals, decentralized systems distribute decision-making power across all members of a group or organization. This approach can lead to more equitable and inclusive outcomes, as it encourages diverse perspectives and ensures that everyone's voice is heard.
In decentralized spaces, various decision-making models can be utilized, such as consensus, consent, liquid democracy, or holacracy. These models emphasize collaboration, transparency, and adaptability, allowing organizations to be more responsive to their members' needs and preferences. However, decentralized decision-making also comes with its own set of challenges, such as increased complexity, slower decision-making processes, and the potential for decision-making paralysis.
One key challenge in decentralized decision-making is achieving a balance between inclusivity and efficiency. Including everyone in the decision-making process can lead to more diverse input and better decision outcomes, but it can also slow down the process, as reaching agreement among a larger group of individuals can be time-consuming. To address this challenge, decentralized organizations often implement decision-making frameworks that strike a balance between speed and inclusivity.
Another challenge is managing conflicts that arise from differing opinions and priorities among group members. In decentralized spaces, it is crucial to develop conflict resolution processes that are fair, transparent, and inclusive. This might involve establishing clear communication channels, setting up mediation processes, and providing training on conflict resolution for members.
Section 1.4: Why Good Decision-Making Matters
Good decision-making is critical for the success and sustainability of any group or organization. Effective decision-making processes can lead to better resource allocation, increased productivity, and more cohesive and collaborative teams. Conversely, poor decision-making can result in wasted resources, internal conflicts, and, ultimately, the failure of the organization.
Chapter 2: Exploring Different Forms of Decision Making
In this chapter, we'll dive deeper into the various forms of decision-making that exist in different organizations and communities. We'll introduce you to different decision-making systems, discuss their strengths and weaknesses, and provide you with resources to learn more about each system. Additionally, you'll have the opportunity to experiment with different decision-making styles within your own group and share your experiences with others.
Section 2.1: Introduction to Different Forms of Decision Making
Some common decision-making models include:
Autocratic decision making: This model involves a single person, often a leader or manager, making decisions without input from others. While autocratic decision making can be efficient and timely, it may lead to resentment among team members and may not take into account diverse perspectives.
Democratic decision making: In this model, decisions are made based on majority vote. This approach can be inclusive and promote a sense of ownership among team members, but it may also result in the exclusion of minority viewpoints.
Consensus decision making: This model aims to reach a decision that is acceptable to all group members. Consensus decision making can be highly collaborative and foster a sense of unity within a team. However, it may also be time-consuming and challenging to achieve consensus in large or diverse groups.
Delegated decision making: In this approach, decision-making authority is delegated to specific individuals or sub-groups within the organization. This can be an effective way to balance the need for efficiency and expertise while maintaining some degree of collaboration and input from the broader group.
Liquid democracy: This model allows individuals to delegate their decision-making power to others on a per-issue basis. This approach can lead to more informed and representative decision making, as individuals can delegate their vote to someone with more knowledge or expertise on a specific issue.
By examining these different decision-making models, organizations can better understand the advantages and drawbacks of each approach and make informed choices about which model best aligns with their goals, values, and needs. In the following sections, we will delve deeper into different forms of decision making, providing resources and examples to further your understanding of these models.
Section 2.2: Different Forms of Decision Making
Section 2.3: Strengths and Weaknesses of Different Decision-Making Systems
Autocratic decision making
Autocratic decision making is a form of decision making where a single person, often a leader or manager, makes decisions without seeking input from others. This top-down approach is characterized by centralized control, and the decision-maker is solely responsible for the outcomes of their choices.
Advantages of Autocratic Decision Making:
Speed: Autocratic decision making can be fast and efficient, as there is no need to consult or debate with others before making a decision. This can be beneficial in situations where time is critical, or a swift response is necessary.
Clarity: Autocratic decision making can provide clear direction and avoid confusion, as there is a single point of authority, and decisions are not influenced by multiple perspectives.
Expertise: In some cases, the person making decisions may have unique expertise or knowledge that is crucial to the decision-making process. Autocratic decision making can leverage this expertise and ensure that decisions are informed by the best available information.
Disadvantages of Autocratic Decision Making:
Limited perspectives: By excluding input from others, autocratic decision making can lead to decisions that are not informed by diverse perspectives, which may result in suboptimal outcomes.
Decreased motivation and morale: Team members may feel disempowered and resentful if they are excluded from the decision-making process, leading to decreased motivation, job satisfaction, and morale.
Resistance to change: Autocratic decision making can make it difficult to implement change, as team members may resist decisions that they do not feel invested in or do not fully understand.
Democratic decision making
Democratic decision making is a decision-making model that involves reaching decisions based on majority vote. This approach is characterized by its inclusivity, as it seeks to include the perspectives of all members of the group or organization. By allowing everyone to participate in the decision-making process, democratic decision making can foster a sense of ownership and shared responsibility.
Advantages of Democratic Decision Making:
Inclusivity: Democratic decision making promotes the inclusion of diverse perspectives, which can lead to more well-rounded and informed decisions that consider multiple viewpoints.
Increased buy-in: When team members feel their voices are heard and valued, they are more likely to support and actively engage in implementing the decisions that are made.
Fairness: Democratic decision making is seen as a fair and equitable process, as each member has an equal opportunity to participate and influence the decision.
Disadvantages of Democratic Decision Making:
Slower decision-making process: Involving everyone in the decision-making process can be time-consuming, as it may require extensive discussion and debate to reach a majority consensus.
Risk of groupthink: Democratic decision making may inadvertently lead to groupthink, a phenomenon where the desire for harmony and conformity can lead to poor decision-making outcomes, as dissenting opinions are suppressed.
Exclusion of minority viewpoints: Decisions made based on majority vote may not always accommodate the needs and concerns of minority viewpoints, potentially leading to dissatisfaction and disengagement among those who do not agree with the majority decision.
Consensus Decision Making
Consensus decision making is a collaborative decision-making model that aims to reach a decision that is acceptable to all group members. This approach emphasizes active listening, open communication, and the willingness to compromise in order to achieve a collective agreement that takes into account the needs and concerns of all participants.
Advantages of Consensus Decision Making:
Collaboration: Consensus decision making fosters a collaborative environment, encouraging group members to work together, share ideas, and support one another in reaching a mutually agreeable decision.
Higher-quality decisions: By considering diverse perspectives and addressing the concerns of all members, consensus decision making can lead to more comprehensive and well-rounded decisions that are better suited to address the issue at hand.
Increased commitment: When group members are actively involved in the decision-making process and feel that their concerns have been addressed, they are more likely to be committed to the implementation of the decision and its success.
Disadvantages of Consensus Decision Making:
Time-consuming: Achieving consensus can be a lengthy process, as it requires extensive discussion, negotiation, and compromise to reach a decision that is acceptable to all members.
Risk of stagnation: In some cases, consensus decision making can result in decision paralysis, where the group is unable to reach an agreement due to irreconcilable differences or the unwillingness of members to compromise.
Dominance of vocal individuals: In consensus decision-making processes, more assertive or vocal members may inadvertently dominate the discussion, potentially skewing the outcome in favor of their views and undermining the intended inclusivity of the process.
Delegated Decision Making
Delegated decision making is a decision-making model that involves assigning decision-making authority to specific individuals or sub-groups within the organization. This approach aims to balance the need for efficiency and expertise while maintaining some degree of collaboration and input from the broader group.
Advantages of Delegated Decision Making:
Efficiency: Delegating decision-making authority can lead to faster decision making, as decisions can be made by those with the relevant expertise without needing to involve the entire group in the process.
Empowerment: Delegated decision making can empower individuals and sub-groups by giving them the responsibility and authority to make decisions, fostering a sense of ownership and engagement.
Expertise: Decisions made by individuals or sub-groups with specialized knowledge or expertise in a particular area are likely to be more informed and effective than decisions made by a larger group without this specific knowledge.
Disadvantages of Delegated Decision Making:
Limited input: By delegating decision-making authority, the input and perspectives of the broader group may be excluded, potentially leading to less well-rounded decisions.
Accountability concerns: Delegating decision-making authority can create concerns about accountability and responsibility, as it may be unclear who is ultimately responsible for the outcomes of the decisions made by the delegated individuals or sub-groups.
Potential for siloed thinking: Delegated decision making may lead to siloed thinking and a lack of coordination between different sub-groups, which could result in decisions that are not aligned with the overall goals and objectives of the organization.
Liquid democracy
Liquid democracy decision making is a decision-making model that combines elements of direct democracy and representative democracy, allowing individuals to either vote directly on issues or delegate their voting power to trusted representatives. This approach aims to create a more flexible and responsive democratic system that adapts to the varying levels of expertise and interest among the electorate.
Advantages of Liquid Democracy Decision Making:
Flexibility: Liquid democracy enables individuals to choose their level of participation in the decision-making process, allowing them to directly vote on issues they feel strongly about or delegate their voting power to others when they lack expertise or interest.
Responsive representation: By allowing individuals to delegate their voting power, liquid democracy can result in more responsive and knowledgeable representation on specific issues, as individuals can select representatives with expertise in a particular domain.
Increased engagement: Liquid democracy can foster greater civic engagement by providing individuals with more control over their participation in the decision-making process, which may lead to a stronger sense of ownership and responsibility in the outcomes of decisions.
Disadvantages of Liquid Democracy Decision Making:
Complexity: Implementing a liquid democracy system can be complex, requiring robust technological solutions to manage the delegation of voting power and the aggregation of votes.
Potential for manipulation: The delegation of voting power could lead to the concentration of power in the hands of a few influential individuals, increasing the potential for manipulation and undermining the democratic process.
Unequal participation: In a liquid democracy system, individuals with more time, resources, or expertise may be more likely to participate actively in the decision-making process, potentially leading to unequal representation and influence among the electorate.
Quiz: Make a short quiz (maybe 10 questions?) asking students about the main ideas behind each of the decision making systems explained above
Section 2.4: Trying Decision-Making Styles with Your Group
Experimenting with different decision-making styles in your group can provide valuable insights into which approaches work best for your unique context and needs. By trying out various decision-making models, your group can identify the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and make informed choices about the most effective methods for achieving your goals and objectives.
Key Steps for Trying Decision-Making Styles with Your Group:
Assess your current decision-making process: Start by evaluating the existing decision-making methods used in your group. Identify any challenges, inefficiencies, or areas for improvement that may be addressed by adopting a different decision-making style.
Introduce alternative decision-making styles: Present your group with an overview of various decision-making models, including their advantages and disadvantages. Encourage open discussion and exploration of these different approaches.
Select a decision-making style to test: Based on the group's needs and the identified areas for improvement, choose a decision-making style to experiment with. Ensure that all group members understand the principles and processes involved in the chosen approach.
Implement the selected decision-making style: Apply the chosen decision-making model to a specific decision or series of decisions, closely monitoring the process and outcomes. Encourage group members to actively engage in the new decision-making method and provide feedback on their experiences.
Evaluate the results: After testing the selected decision-making style, gather feedback from group members on the effectiveness of the approach. Assess the outcomes of the decisions made using the new model, considering factors such as decision quality, efficiency, and group satisfaction.
Iterate and refine: Based on the evaluation results, determine whether to adopt the tested decision-making style permanently, modify it to better suit your group's needs, or explore other decision-making models. Continuously iterate and refine your decision-making processes to ensure they remain effective and aligned with your group's goals.
By following these steps, your group can actively experiment with different decision-making styles and determine the most suitable approach for your specific needs and context. Remember that the optimal decision-making model may vary depending on factors such as group size, complexity of decisions, and the desired level of participation and collaboration. Be open to adapting and evolving your decision-making processes as your group and its needs change over time.
We highly recommend reaching out to well trained and experienced facilitators which can support you on your decision making tryouts.
Homework: Talk about your experience with exploring different decision making styles in the course forum.
Chapter 3: Deep Dives into Specific Decision-Making Systems
This chapter focuses on a select few decision-making systems that have proven to be effective in various contexts. We'll provide a more in-depth exploration of each system, including the Advice Process, Facilitated Consent Process, and Miro-facilitated Voting. By the end of this chapter, you'll have a deeper understanding of these systems and how they can be applied to your own group or organization.
Section 3.1: Intro to Decision Making Deep Dives
In the world of decision making, there are a variety of models and processes that have been developed to address different contexts, needs, and challenges. To gain a deeper understanding of these approaches and how they can be effectively applied in your group or organization, it's essential to explore some of the most prominent decision-making systems in greater detail. These deep dives will provide valuable insights into the underlying principles, practical applications, and potential benefits of each decision-making model.
In this chapter, we will be introducing several decision-making systems that have gained significant attention and adoption across various domains. These systems include the Advice Process, Facilitated Consent Process, and Liquid Democracy, among others. By delving into the specifics of each approach, you'll be better equipped to determine which decision-making styles best align with your group's needs, goals, and preferences.
Section 3.2: The Advice Process
The Advice Process is a decision-making model that emphasizes the importance of seeking input and feedback from others before making a decision. While this approach may seem intuitive, it is often underutilized or overlooked in many decision-making contexts. In this deep dive, we will explore some lesser-known aspects and practical applications of the Advice Process that can enhance its effectiveness in your group or organization.
The origin of the Advice Process:
The Advice Process traces its roots back to the management philosophy of self-organization, which has been popularized by companies like Semco, a Brazilian manufacturing company, and later adopted by other organizations, including Morning Star and Zappos. These companies have implemented variations of the Advice Process to encourage decentralized decision-making and empower employees at all levels of the organization.
The Advice Process in practice:
In the Advice Process, decision-makers are responsible for seeking advice from individuals who will be affected by the decision and those who possess relevant knowledge or expertise. This advice-seeking process should be genuine, with the decision-maker actively engaging in conversation, asking clarifying questions, and considering alternative perspectives. Ultimately, the decision-maker remains accountable for the final decision, but the process ensures that a diverse range of inputs and perspectives are taken into account.
Advantages:
Ensures diverse input and perspectives are considered in decision-making.
Encourages active engagement and communication between decision-makers and stakeholders.
Disadvantages:
Can be time-consuming, particularly for complex decisions with many stakeholders involved.
Relies on the decision-maker's ability to genuinely seek and consider advice, which may be challenging for some individuals.
The role of trust and psychological safety:
The effectiveness of the Advice Process depends on a high degree of trust and psychological safety within the group or organization. When individuals feel comfortable sharing their opinions, concerns, and ideas openly, the quality of the advice received and the resulting decisions are likely to improve. Fostering a culture of trust and psychological safety can be achieved through transparency, active listening, and respecting different viewpoints.
Advantages:
Fosters open communication and collaboration within the group or organization.
Enhances the quality of advice received and improves decision-making outcomes.
Disadvantages:
Building trust and psychological safety requires ongoing effort and commitment from all members of the group or organization.
May be difficult to achieve in larger organizations or in environments with high turnover rates.
The importance of feedback loops:
An essential aspect of the Advice Process is the presence of feedback loops that allow for continuous learning and improvement. After a decision is made, decision-makers should gather feedback on the outcomes and consequences of their decision, using this information to inform future decision-making processes. This iterative approach helps ensure that the group or organization is consistently learning from its experiences and refining its decision-making practices.
Advantages:
Facilitates continuous learning and improvement in decision-making practices.
Allows for adjustments and refinements to be made based on the outcomes of previous decisions.
Disadvantages:
Requires a commitment to regularly gathering and acting on feedback, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.
Adapting the Advice Process to different contexts:
The Advice Process can be adapted to a variety of decision-making contexts and group sizes. For example, in smaller groups, the Advice Process may involve more informal and direct communication, while larger organizations may require more structured and formalized advice-seeking methods, such as surveys or designated feedback channels.
Advantages:
Demonstrates the versatility and adaptability of the Advice Process, making it suitable for various group sizes and decision-making contexts.
Encourages the customization of the Advice Process to better suit the specific needs and goals of each group or organization.
Disadvantages:
Adapting the Advice Process may require trial and error, as well as a willingness to iterate and evolve the approach over time.
The effectiveness of the adapted process may vary depending on the unique dynamics and challenges of each group or organization.
Section 3.3: Facilitated Consent Process
The Facilitated Consent Process, also known as Generative Decision Making, is a collaborative and inclusive approach to decision-making that focuses on creating a shared understanding and obtaining consent from all group members. In this essay, we will explore the key principles, applications, and challenges of the Facilitated Consent Process, providing a comprehensive overview of this innovative decision-making model.
At the heart of the Facilitated Consent Process is the idea that decisions should be made in a manner that incorporates the perspectives and concerns of all group members. This is achieved through a structured process, typically involving rounds of proposal generation, clarifying questions, and objections, aimed at fostering open dialogue and addressing any concerns or reservations.
One of the primary benefits of the Facilitated Consent Process is its focus on inclusivity and equal participation. By ensuring that all voices are heard and considered, the process leads to more informed and balanced decisions. Additionally, the emphasis on addressing objections and concerns helps to minimize the risk of negative consequences or unforeseen issues arising from the decision.
The Facilitated Consent Process has been adopted and adapted by various organizations and groups seeking to create more collaborative and egalitarian decision-making environments. This approach has proven particularly effective in situations where there is a need to balance diverse perspectives and interests, such as community organizations, worker cooperatives, and non-hierarchical teams.
However, the Facilitated Consent Process is not without its challenges. One potential drawback is the time and effort required to reach consensus, particularly for larger groups or complex decisions. Additionally, the process relies on the willingness of group members to participate actively and constructively, which may be difficult to achieve in some contexts.
Despite these challenges, the Facilitated Consent Process offers a promising alternative to traditional decision-making models, promoting inclusivity, collaboration, and mutual understanding. By adapting and refining the process to suit the unique needs and goals of each group or organization, the Facilitated Consent Process can help foster more democratic, equitable, and effective decision-making environments.
Advantages:
Inclusivity: The Facilitated Consent Process ensures that all voices are heard and considered, leading to more inclusive and balanced decisions.
Collaboration: By fostering open dialogue and addressing concerns, the process encourages collaboration among group members, often resulting in creative solutions and compromises.
Adaptability: The Facilitated Consent Process can be adapted to various contexts, making it suitable for different types of organizations and groups.
Minimizing negative consequences: The emphasis on addressing objections and concerns helps to minimize the risk of unforeseen issues or negative consequences arising from the decision.
Shared ownership: The process creates a sense of shared ownership and responsibility for decisions, as all members have participated in the decision-making process and provided their consent.
Disadvantages:
Time-consuming: The Facilitated Consent Process can be time-consuming, particularly for larger groups or complex decisions.
Active participation: The process relies on the willingness of group members to participate actively and constructively, which may be difficult to achieve in some contexts.
Potential for stagnation: In cases where consensus cannot be reached, the process may result in decision-making stagnation, delaying important decisions or actions.
Skill requirements: Effective facilitation is crucial for the success of the process, and skilled facilitators may not always be available or may require training.
Implementation challenges: Transitioning to the Facilitated Consent Process may require a significant shift in organizational culture and decision-making practices, which can be challenging for some organizations.
Add a video about either Advice Process or Generative Consent to add some human generated content
Homework: try one or more of these or discuss in forums why or why you would not try advice process or facilitated consent in your group.
Section 3.4: Miro-facilitated Voting
This might be a great chapter to create a video for the whole thing with Tevo showing how people vote on a selected set of sticky notes and how to set that up, how to get the results, and how that all works.
Chapter 4: Contributing to the Governance Guild Curriculum
Perhaps this section can cover our Discord server, how someone might join the Governance Guild, and how to participate in improving this course or adding new content. Make it less of content we provide, but ways for students to participate. Assignments can be:
Course survey and feedback
Ideas for improvements
Contributing new modules
Discussing with other students what went well, what could use some improvement in the course materials.
In the final chapter of this course, we'll shift our focus to your contributions to the Governance Guild curriculum. We value your feedback and suggestions for improving the course, as well as your participation in governance discussions. Here, you'll have the opportunity to share your thoughts, propose new modules or changes to existing ones, and collaborate with others to refine the course materials.
Section 4.1: Providing Feedback and Suggestions
Effective decision-making relies on the continuous improvement of processes and the refinement of decisions based on feedback from stakeholders. Providing feedback and suggestions is crucial for organizations and groups, as it allows them to identify areas of improvement, recognize successful practices, and adjust their decision-making processes accordingly.
There are several methods for collecting feedback and suggestions, including:
Surveys and questionnaires: These can be used to gather quantitative and qualitative feedback from stakeholders, allowing for the analysis of trends and patterns in responses.
Focus groups and interviews: These can provide in-depth insights into specific issues, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of stakeholder perspectives.
Suggestion boxes and online forums: These can facilitate the submission of feedback and ideas on an ongoing basis, encouraging continuous improvement.
Regular meetings and debriefs: These can provide opportunities for stakeholders to share their thoughts and discuss issues in a structured and timely manner.
Each of these methods has its advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages:
Diverse input: Collecting feedback from a wide range of stakeholders allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process and its outcomes.
Continuous improvement: Regular feedback can help organizations and groups identify areas for improvement and refine their decision-making processes over time.
Increased stakeholder engagement: Encouraging feedback and suggestions can foster a sense of ownership and participation among stakeholders, leading to greater engagement and commitment to the decision-making process.
Disadvantages:
Time and resource constraints: Collecting and analyzing feedback can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, particularly for larger organizations or complex decision-making processes.
Balancing feedback: It can be challenging to balance diverse feedback and suggestions, as some stakeholders may have conflicting priorities or perspectives.
Potential for bias: The methods used to collect feedback may introduce biases, such as self-selection or response bias, which can affect the validity and generalizability of the findings.
By understanding the importance of feedback and suggestions in decision-making and governance, as well as the benefits and challenges associated with different methods of collecting feedback, organizations and groups can implement strategies to effectively gather and incorporate stakeholder input into their decision-making processes.
Section 4.2: Participating in Governance Discussions
Community governance refers to the systems and processes through which decisions are made and implemented at the community level. Engaging in community governance can take various forms, including participating in local meetings, joining committees or working groups, contributing to online discussions, and collaborating on projects or initiatives. Active involvement in community governance is vital for fostering a sense of ownership, responsibility, and commitment among stakeholders, as well as ensuring that decisions are made in a transparent, democratic, and inclusive manner.
There are several benefits and challenges associated with engaging in community governance:
Advantages:
Increased inclusivity: Active participation in community governance ensures that diverse perspectives and needs are considered in decision-making processes, leading to more inclusive and equitable outcomes.
Enhanced decision-making: Engaging a wide range of stakeholders in the decision-making process can lead to more informed, creative, and effective decisions.
Empowerment: Participating in community governance can empower individuals and organizations, fostering a sense of agency and control over their environment and the decisions that affect them.
Strengthened community bonds: Active involvement in community governance can help build social capital, fostering connections and relationships among community members and organizations.
Disadvantages:
Time and resource constraints: Engaging in community governance can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, particularly for individuals or organizations with limited capacity.
Potential for conflict: Involving diverse stakeholders in decision-making processes may lead to disagreements and conflicts, which can be challenging to manage and resolve.
Power dynamics: Existing power imbalances within a community may influence the decision-making process, potentially leading to the exclusion or marginalization of certain groups or perspectives.
Complexity: Navigating the complexities of community governance and decision-making processes can be daunting, particularly for individuals or organizations with limited experience or knowledge in this area.
Section 4.3: Proposing New Modules or Changes to Existing Ones
Keep in mind that whatever decision model you will design and implement into your project, your project evolves and so does its need for adjustments of your decision making model.
Therefore it is crucial to also design a process which allows your project to effectively streamline processes to improve, adjust and update parameters of your decision making model.
This can be achieved through several possible approaches
Proposal process
A process in which team members or groups within your organisation are able to submit proposals which suggest and describe envisioned improvements to your decision making model
When looking on proposal processes, keep in mind that this approach requires
A well formulated way of creating and submitting proposals
A clear approach on assessing and evaluating submitted proposals
A clear system to approve submitted proposals
A effective way to implement approved proposals
A constant capacity to oversee and analyse implemented proposals
Meetings and Workshops
Dedicated meetings in which team members are able to communicate envisioned improvements. Such meetings
Section 4.4: Collaborative Course Improvement
We should have a survey or form for students to provide feedback for the course here
Last updated