Welcome back to Blueprints for Change, Headwaters’ blog series that takes you behind the scenes of Headwaters’ journey to transform our internal structure, policies, and key practices.
In our previous installment, we shared the beginnings of our journey towards organizational transformation. This time, we’re diving into Headwaters’ decision-making practices!
Since 2022, we’ve shifted from a traditional, top-down individual approach to decision-making to a democratized, team-based, and input-rich decision-making model. According to this model, our decisions must be grounded in input from our colleagues and made in consultation (or in some cases, consensus!) with our teammates.
Thanks to this work, we’ve built tools, processes, and workflows within the organization that make sure we all have a voice. This hasn’t just changed how we work - it has also fundamentally shifted and strengthened our culture.
Read on to learn how!
Democratizing Decision-Making
Leadership transitions in 2022 coincided with significant questions among remaining staff about leadership models, equity, and pay and a desire to imagine a more liberatory and values-aligned workplace. As a result, we knew we needed a more permanent decision-making process to guide us as we navigated these important decisions and our day-to-day work.
In January 2023, our organizational development consultants, Dragonfly Partners, facilitated a staff retreat where we developed the beginnings of our staff decision-making guide. You can read more about the retreat here.
The process we used to design our guide’s first draft was consensus-based and relied on input and consent from all staff.
Leadership transitions in 2022 coincided with significant questions among remaining staff about leadership models, equity, and pay and a desire to imagine a more liberatory and values-aligned workplace. As a result, we knew we needed a more permanent decision-making process to guide us as we navigated these important decisions and our day-to-day work.
In January 2023, our organizational development consultants, Dragonfly Partners, facilitated a staff retreat where we developed the beginnings of our staff decision-making guide. You can read more about the retreat here.
The process we used to design our guide’s first draft was consensus-based and relied on input and consent from all staff. It was grounded in shared values our staff identified: transparency, trust, meaningful voice, collaboration, and space for imagination. These values, we agreed, described how we wanted to make decisions at Headwaters.
Over the next year, we practiced using the tool to guide our decision-making in our day-to-day work. We slowly refined our practices, processes, and tools with Dragonfly’s guidance. Thanks to their support and consultation with other experts, we gained skills and practice in making decisions collectively.
Leadership transitions in 2022 coincided with significant questions among remaining staff about leadership models, equity, and pay and a desire to imagine a more liberatory and values-aligned workplace. As a result, we knew we needed a more permanent decision-making process to guide us as we navigated these important decisions and our day-to-day work.
In January 2023, our organizational development consultants, Dragonfly Partners, facilitated a staff retreat where we developed the beginnings of our staff decision-making guide. You can read more about the retreat here.
The process we used to design our guide’s first draft was consensus-based and relied on input and consent from all staff. It was grounded in shared values our staff identified: transparency, trust, meaningful voice, collaboration, and space for imagination. These values, we agreed, described how we wanted to make decisions at Headwaters.
Leadership transitions in 2022 coincided with significant questions among remaining staff about leadership models, equity, and pay and a desire to imagine a more liberatory and values-aligned workplace. As a result, we knew we needed a more permanent decision-making process to guide us as we navigated these important decisions and our day-to-day work.
In January 2023, our organizational development consultants, Dragonfly Partners, facilitated a staff retreat where we developed the beginnings of our staff decision-making guide. You can read more about the retreat here.
The process we used to design our guide’s first draft was consensus-based and relied on input and consent from all staff.
In November 2023, we formally adopted an updated decision-making process as our official practice at Headwaters.
It was grounded in shared values our staff identified: transparency, trust, meaningful voice, collaboration, and space for imagination. These values, we agreed, described how we wanted to make decisions at Headwaters.
Over the next year, we practiced using the tool to guide our decision-making in our day-to-day work. We slowly refined our practices, processes, and tools with Dragonfly’s guidance. Thanks to their support and consultation with other experts, we gained skills and practice in making decisions collectively.
In November 2023, we formally adopted an updated decision-making process as our official practice at Headwaters.
Over the next year, we practiced using the tool to guide our decision-making in our day-to-day work. We slowly refined our practices, processes, and tools with Dragonfly’s guidance. Thanks to their support and consultation with other experts, we gained skills and practice in making decisions collectively.
In November 2023, we formally adopted an updated decision-making process as our official practice at Headwaters.
Headwaters' Decision-Making Model: An Overview
The default mode of decision-making at Headwaters is called the advice process. The advice process is a decision-making model that requires individuals or groups to consult and get input from relevant members of the team before making a decision.
Within an advice process we:
- Identify the person responsible for a decision.
- That person proactively seeks advice from:
- Everyone who will be significantly impacted by the decision.
- People who will help them make a better decision (due to a particular experience/expertise they may have).
- That person uses their advice and input to make the decision as an individual or may choose to ask a group of people to make the decision together. A group can include the full staff.
Not all decisions at Headwaters require the same level of input or consultation. For most people’s day-to-day work, many of the decisions they make are directly under their purview according to their job description.
However, when a decision impacts a colleague, team, shared body of work, or something at the organizational level, consultation is usually needed. Many decisions at Headwaters require input from a department, team, committee, or colleagues who have expertise. Some decisions – particularly ones related to organizational-level policy and practice – require full staff consultation and, in some specific cases, full staff consensus.
We gather input in a variety of ways, including team meetings, staff meetings, one-on-one chats, emails, Teams messages, electronic polls, and more. In instances where consensus is required, we use the Fist-to-Five voting method.
The default mode of decision-making at Headwaters is called the advice process. The advice process is a decision-making model that requires individuals or groups to consult and get input from relevant members of the team before making a decision.
Within an advice process we:
- Identify the person responsible for a decision.
- That person proactively seeks advice from:
- Everyone who will be significantly impacted by the decision.
- People who will help them make a better decision (due to a particular experience/expertise they may have).
- That person uses their advice and input to make the decision as an individual or may choose to ask a group of people to make the decision together. A group can include the full staff.
Not all decisions at Headwaters require the same level of input or consultation. For most people’s day-to-day work, many of the decisions they make are directly under their purview according to their job description.
However, when a decision impacts a colleague, team, shared body of work, or something at the organizational level, consultation is usually needed. Many decisions at Headwaters require input from a department, team, committee, or colleagues who have expertise. Some decisions – particularly ones related to organizational-level policy and practice – require full staff consultation and, in some specific cases, full staff consensus.
We gather input in a variety of ways, including team meetings, staff meetings, one-on-one chats, emails, Teams messages, electronic polls, and more. In instances where consensus is required, we use the Fist-to-Five voting method.
However, when a decision impacts a colleague, team, shared body of work, or something at the organizational level, consultation is usually needed. Many decisions at Headwaters require input from a department, team, committee, or colleagues who have expertise. Some decisions – particularly ones related to organizational-level policy and practice – require full staff consultation and, in some specific cases, full staff consensus.
We gather input in a variety of ways, including team meetings, staff meetings, one-on-one chats, emails, Teams messages, electronic polls, and more. In instances where consensus is required, we use the Fist-to-Five voting method.
Gathering input, sharing proposals, and checking for consensus in decisions have become everyday practice at Headwaters, supported by integration into our workflows.
For example, we use:
However, when a decision impacts a colleague, team, shared body of work, or something at the organizational level, consultation is usually needed. Many decisions at Headwaters require input from a department, team, committee, or colleagues who have expertise. Some decisions – particularly ones related to organizational-level policy and practice – require full staff consultation and, in some specific cases, full staff consensus.
We gather input in a variety of ways, including team meetings, staff meetings, one-on-one chats, emails, Teams messages, electronic polls, and more. In instances where consensus is required, we use the Fist-to-Five voting method.
Gathering input, sharing proposals, and checking for consensus in decisions have become everyday practice at Headwaters, supported by integration into our workflows
For example, we use:
- Coffee hours to gather interests and feedback
- Staff meetings to present proposals, gather interests, and hold votes
- Committee meetings to do research and consult experts
- Team meetings to practice group decision-making on the team level
- Circles (working groups or committees focused on particular topics or bodies of work) to develop proposals for staff input and discussion
- Trust in our colleagues if we are unable to engage in a decision-making process.
- Coffee hours to gather interests and feedback
- Staff meetings to present proposals, gather interests, and hold votes
- Committee meetings to do research and consult experts
- Team meetings to practice group decision-making on the team level
- Circles (working groups or committees focused on particular topics or bodies of work) to develop proposals for staff input and discussion
- Trust in our colleagues if we are unable to engage in a decision-making process.
Gathering input, sharing proposals, and checking for consensus in decisions have become everyday practice at Headwaters, supported by integration into our workflows For example, we use:
- Coffee hours to gather interests and feedback
- Staff meetings to present proposals, gather interests, and hold votes
- Committee meetings to do research and consult experts
- Team meetings to practice group decision-making on the team level
- Circles (working groups or committees focused on particular topics or bodies of work) to develop proposals for staff input and discussion.
- Trust in our colleagues if we are unable to engage in a decision-making process.
Growing our confidence, finding our edges
When done well, collective decision-making feels energizing, satisfying, and encouraging. Coming together to work through challenging questions and arrive at a meaningfully informed decision is the reward for our two years of hard work.
But over the past two years, we have also sometimes felt frustrated, confused, or unsure. For many of us, consensus-based decision-making isn’t something we’ve practiced outside of Headwaters. Sometimes we leave meetings feeling frustrated, stalled out, or bogged down by having to rework a proposal, reconcile opposing interests, or confused about how to move forward.
Critically, when this happens we don’t take this as a sign to move away from collective decision-making. Instead, we slow down and ask what is gumming us up. What tendencies, patterns, or unspoken assumptions do we have as a staff or as individuals that are holding up our process?
Over the last two years we’ve identified and addressed growth areas including:
- Handling conflict well, so it moves us forward instead of stopping our progress
- Asking and responding to curious questions
- Communicating across difference, with particular attention to race
- Building and practicing trust
- Giving and receiving feedback
We’ve also seen the way collective decision-making has shifted our organizational culture for the better. Collective decision-making requires all staff to have buy-in and input in decisions that affect their work and their colleagues. This means that everyone is valued for their experience, knowledge, and reflections and is expected to share them. We believe each person’s insight makes our work better. So, we work to build a culture where every individual feels empowered and able to share that input – across all settings.
Two years on, our meetings include more voices, our brainstorming elicits more ideas, and our final products are stronger and more reflective of a multitude of experiences, points of view, and expertise.
As a result, our decision-making processes have evolved and become more streamlined. While the core features of the tool and our practice of it remain the same, some of our processes look different today than they did in November 2023. And while we have become more adept in many ways, our process is never perfect and not without tension or bumps along the way.
Starting this fall, our Organizational Development Committee began reviewing and evaluating this tool. They’ve held staff feedback and interest gathering sessions and will be working to update the tool (with staff consensus) to reflect our current practice this spring. The tool will remain a support for rigorous and thoughtful collective decision-making and will better reflect how HFJ staff use it in our daily work.
When our tool has been updated, we will publish an updated version for our community to see! For now, we offer our most recent, staff-approved version to our community to see, use, and take with you.
Two years on, our meetings include more voices, our brainstorming elicits more ideas, and our final products are stronger and more reflective of a multitude of experiences, points of view, and expertise.
As a result, our decision-making processes have evolved and become more streamlined. While the core features of the tool and our practice of it remain the same, some of our processes look different today than they did in November 2023. And while we have become more adept in many ways, our process is never perfect and not without tension or bumps along the way.
Starting this fall, our Organizational Development Committee began reviewing and evaluating this tool. They’ve held staff feedback and interest gathering sessions and will be working to update the tool (with staff consensus) to reflect our current practice this spring.
Two years on, our meetings include more voices, our brainstorming elicits more ideas, and our final products are stronger and more reflective of a multitude of experiences, points of view, and expertise.
As a result, our decision-making processes have evolved and become more streamlined. While the core features of the tool and our practice of it remain the same, some of our processes look different today than they did in November 2023. And while we have become more adept in many ways, our process is never perfect and not without tension or bumps along the way.
Starting this fall, our Organizational Development Committee began reviewing and evaluating this tool.
The tool will remain a support for rigorous and thoughtful collective decision-making and will better reflect how HFJ staff use it in our daily work.
When our tool has been updated, we will publish an updated version for our community to see! For now, we offer our most recent, staff-approved version to our community to see, use, and take with you.
Two years on, our meetings include more voices, our brainstorming elicits more ideas, and our final products are stronger and more reflective of a multitude of experiences, points of view, and expertise.
As a result, our decision-making processes have evolved and become more streamlined. While the core features of the tool and our practice of it remain the same, some of our processes look different today than they did in November 2023. And while we have become more adept in many ways, our process is never perfect and not without tension or bumps along the way.
Starting this fall, our Organizational Development Committee began reviewing and evaluating this tool. They’ve held staff feedback and interest gathering sessions and will be working to update the tool (with staff consensus) to reflect our current practice this spring. The tool will remain a support for rigorous and thoughtful collective decision-making and will better reflect how HFJ staff use it in our daily work.
When our tool has been updated, we will publish an updated version for our community to see! For now, we offer our most recent, staff-approved version to our community to see, use, and take with you.
They’ve held staff feedback and interest gathering sessions and will be working to update the tool (with staff consensus) to reflect our current practice this spring. The tool will remain a support for rigorous and thoughtful collective decision-making and will better reflect how HFJ staff use it in our daily work.
When our tool has been updated, we will publish an updated version for our community to see! For now, we offer our most recent, staff-approved version to our community to see, use, and take with you.
- There are many models of decision-making out there. None is one-size-fits-all. Your decision-making model should be grounded in your staff and your organization’s needs. Before finding a process that worked for us, we had to determine what mattered to us about how decision-making got done and how our values informed our process. We built from there.
- Trust is a key ingredient in good decision-making. Whether your colleagues entrust decision-making power to others or make decisions together, you need to have confidence in each other. Finding ways to build trust, communication, and connection among staff supports your process.
- Good decisions take time. Our decisions take longer now that we practice collective decision-making. But we save time knowing that we’ve asked the necessary questions, checked in with the appropriate colleagues, and grounded ourselves in our values before acting. Our decisions are stronger and our projects are more streamlined – even if getting started takes a little longer.
- Collective decision-making isn’t about making everyone happy. It’s about making sure that the right people have a voice in shaping a plan and buying in to its implementation. While a good process ensures that everyone involved has a chance to voice desires and concerns, it’s up to the decision maker(s) to weigh the most pressing concerns and desires – and go from there.
- Slow down, but don’t stall out. When a proposal takes multiple rounds of rewrites or a consultation with a colleague opens a wormhole of additional considerations, it can feel tempting to throw up your hands and abandon a project. Remember: a speed bump is not a road closure. By slowing down, you make sure you have collected all the information, considered the important scenarios, or heard all relevant voices.
- Try, try, and try again. Mistakes, confusion, and frustration are all natural parts of learning new skills. Don’t let the hard work of change discourage you – each attempt grows your proficiency in a new process. Learn and try again.
SMALL
- Read up on different decision-making models. Are there ones that describe how you currently operate? Ones that are intriguing that you’d like to explore?
- Take note of how decisions happen in upcoming meetings or projects. Is decision-making explicit or implicit? Is it based on seniority or position? Is it individual or team-based? Whose voices are heard?
MEDIUM
- Explore the Fist-to-Five decision-making process. Is there one team or committee that could put it into use as a pilot for a month?
LARGE
- Restructure to support a new decision-making process. Implementing our decision-making process necessitated the creation of committees and cross-functional teams to decisions, generate ideas, or provide input. As your organization builds its own decision-making tools and processes, you may need to create or eliminate teams, bodies, or committees to make your plan work.
- Decisions, Decisions: Choosing the Right Decision-Making Approach for Your Organizational Culture by RVC Seattle
- Sick of Both Consensus and Hierarchical Decision-Making? There is a Third Way by RVC Seattle
- Liberatory Decision-Making: How to Engage in a Healthy Process by RVC Seattle
- The Consent Principle by Circle Forward
- Fist to Five Voting and Consensus by National Center for Family Philanthropy