Consensus is Nonsense

I argue that in executive team work, rapid agreement is often mistakenly interpreted as efficiency. An “amicable decision” is more frequently a sign that the hard questions were left unasked.

I remember a situation from the early days of my career as a department head where a massive operating model transformation, affecting hundreds of people, was presented to us.

The decision to proceed was made very quickly, with little discussion. Personally, I felt there were quite clear risks and, frankly, wishful thinking involved. However, I started doubting my own judgment. “If my more experienced colleagues see brilliance in this and I see threats, the flaw must be in my understanding, since I am relatively new to this role.”

So, I did not ask questions. That led to an important learning experience I have returned to dozens of times.

Why?

1. The outcome was mediocre at best. If we had challenged each other, engaging in a genuinely positive debate, we would likely have found a better, more sustainable solution.
2. It created a false sense of commitment. Because different perspectives were not debated at the table, there was no emotional investment. Commitment to execution was thin because no one had had to defend their views under critical scrutiny.

In a complex operating environment, “everyone agrees” is rarely true. If the executive team agrees on everything, it is no longer decision-making; it is a ritual.

Genuine commitment requires that people have been heard, issues have been openly and positively debated, and a shared decision has been made that everyone can lean on. Even those who originally disagreed.

A leader’s duty is to be the demanding person in the room who speaks up when their intuition says “no,” even when everyone else is clapping.

Aspenly · Thinking