While the consensus is good, we absolutely need cooperation. High quality products are a fusion of customer benefits or functionality, usability and design and technology. We need to work closely together to find solutions that meet all three dimensions. Last week, I heard about the term consent versus consensus from a visit to coach Agile and it made me curious. I never knew that there was indeed a difference between consent and consensus. I looked up on the internet and found this: in an acclaimed consensus, there is an explicit “slot machine” for participants to express their views, but its official purpose is not to express dissenting opinions, but to endorse. Participants are asked to confirm that they agree with the “consensus” (for example. B “Does everyone agree?”). It is assumed, yes, that everyone agrees and that participants are expected to only confirm this hypothesis (as suggested by the “few “consensuals” whispered). A “no” is clearly the least preferred option (understood in the text of the question and how it is articulated). Since the consensus decision focuses on the debate and seeks input from all parties involved, it can be a time-taking process. This is a potential liability in situations where decisions must be made quickly or where it is not possible to obtain the advice of all delegates within a reasonable time. In addition, the time required to participate in the consensus decision-making process can sometimes be a barrier to the participation of people who are unable or unable to make the commitment.
 However, once a decision has been made, it can be implemented more quickly than a decision made. American businessmen complained that they had to discuss the idea with everyone, even the janitor, during negotiations with a Japanese company, but as soon as a decision was made, the Americans discovered that the Japanese could act much faster because everyone was on board, while the Americans were in the grip of internal opposition.  Critics of the consensus block often find that while the option is potentially effective for small groups of motivated or trained people with a sufficiently high degree of affinity, it presents a number of possible shortcomings, including the fact that Consensus aims to improve long-term solidarity. It should therefore not be confused with unanimity in the immediate situation, which is often a symptom of group thinking. Studies of an effective consensual process generally suggest a rejection of unanimity or an “illusion of unanimity” that will not be maintained, as a group is under real pressure (when dissent reappears). Cory Doctorow, Ralph Nader and other proponents of deliberative democracy or judicial methods see explicit differences as a symbol of strength. Rules that exist in many languages that require certain parts of a sentence to be used or folded differently depending on certain attributes of other parts. Even if there is a consensus among a group of editors, their preferred result on Wikipedia is not always acceptable. In some cases, other decisions are a priority. For example, Jimbo`s consensual decisions cannot be lacking in Wales, the Board of Directors or developers. Japanese companies generally resort to consensual decisions, which means that unanimous support within the board of directors is sought for each decision.  A ringi-sho is a circulation document with which an agreement is reached.
It must first be signed by the top of the lowest level, then upwards, and perhaps it needs to be revised and the process must be started from the front.  Agreement in the judgment or the opinion of a group as a whole; The Delibeal consensus (the term is inspired by Beatty and Moores (notion of “deliberative acceptance”) not only gives participants the opportunity to express differing opinions, but also actively encourages dis