In Conflict Resolution and Joint Non-Cares as Slack there is an axis of compromise between two mutually exclusive outcomes. The solution involves finding a factor upstream of the axis of compromise, which “unties the knot”.
In Dependency Graphs for Sensemaking dependency graphs can be used to under the causal structure of a complex situation, which implicitly offers a full ordered sequence order of actions to tackle the situation.
While voting is an effective forcing function for consensus, one major weakness with it is that the best outcome is compromise where one or multiple parties feels like losers. This feeling degrades morale while also not leveraging or appreciating the value of what reasoning they brought to the table.
I believe that alignment should be the target, not compromise. Alignment is a much higher bar, but it’s also one that utilizes the wisdom of the group while maximizing a sense of winning from the process, group unity and morale.
One method that comes to mind involves a multiround voting process which goes back and forth between a preference tracking phase (voting) and a sensemaking phase (dependency graph extension).
In a conflict resolution conversation the group makes sense of the conflict in the resolution process. I believe the same is true in voting; voting provides the forcing function to bring everyone to the table to understand the situation.
The intention of this process is to simply start the process, even if the initial understanding of the situation is naive. Moreover the process can be asynchronous or synchronous, where voting and sensemaking phases can be online.
What that would look like is that there’s some kind of conflict which involves some mutually exclusive set of options. These can be converted into voting options and a round of votes can take place to get a sense of group orientation. The next step involves reviewing the options on a dependency graph and attempting to discover upstream dependencies. If there is an upstream dependency which “unlocks” the axis of compromise, then the “center of consensus” can move to this point in the next voting round. Back and forth, until there’s full consensus with a high degree of alignment.
This is all very high-level, the next step is to run experiments and formalize the process so it’s easy to coordinate.