Comparateur de taille
S'inscrire
English Español

Historique de Sociocracy

Mis à jour 23 jan. 2012 21:57:01
Date de création 30 déc. 2011 06:49:20
  • Ferananda le 23 jan. 2012 21:57:01
    Best for
    Best for families, communities that want to live in more harmonious. Who want to focus in responsability, right-placement and values rather than projects.

    For social organisms that shift power to a group of people.
    Rules / Process
    Three main rules:
    "First, the interests of all members must be considered, the individual bowing to the interests of the whole.
    Second, no action can be taken if there are no solutions found that everyone can accept.
    Third, all members must be ready to act according to these unanimous decisions."
    Distinctions
    The aim of sociocracy is inclusive decision-making because it has proven to be more effective. Both consensus and consent are collaborative processes that result in unified, harmonious actions. There are, however, two valuable distinctions:
    (1) The cognitive difference between asking for "agreement" and asking for "no objections" is profound. Consensus facilitators are more likely to be searching for agreement. Sociocratic facilitators specifically look for objections within defined parameters. Asking for agreement affects the perception of participants, often adversely, and influences the kinds of solutions they will propose or accept. To hone a good decision, all the objections must be examined carefully.
    (2) Consensus is specifically a decision-making process and as such is heavily dependent on the skills of the facilitator and the experience of the group. Groups using consensus have no predictable structure for the execution of decisions and must design their own, often building on structures designed to support majority vote decision-making and based on parliamentary procedure. The sociocratic governance structure is specifically designed to support inclusive decision-making and is based on principles derived from cybernetics, systems theory, and complexity theory from which the concept of consent is also derived. Thus the theory base of sociocratic governance and decision-making is more consistent. Good article about this distinctions at:
    http://www.communicatingwithcompassion.org/content/consent%20and%20consensus.htm
    Sociocracy doesn´t have roles accountabilities or gives a 'governance structure' as holacracy.
  • Ferananda le 23 jan. 2012 21:05:50
    Other resources
    Sources about sociocracy http://www.sociocracy.info/
    principles
    Sociocracy was built upon the question of 'how can we make decisions that take care of the needs of everyone involved?'

    Looking for deeper democracy. Focus in the people to integrate and come together. Human-centered values.

    1. Decision Making by Consent: Consent is a method of decision-making whereby the arguments presented in discussing a decision are of paramount importance, and the result of the discussion is that no one present knows of a paramount reason to continue discussion before proceeding with the proposed decision. Note: this is consent, not consensus.
    2. Circle Organization: The organization is built of a hierarchy of semi-autonomous circles. Each circle has its own aim, given by the higher-level circle, and has the authority and responsibility to execute, measure, and control its own processes to move towards its aim.
    3. Double-Linking: A lower circle is always linked to the circle above it via at least two people who belong to and take part in the decision making of both the higher circle and the lower circle. One of these links is the person with overall accountability for the lower-level circle's results, and the other is a representative elected from within the lower-level circle.
    4. Elections by Consent: People are elected to key roles exclusively by consent after open discussion (this is not a democratic majority-vote election!). Most notably, the election process applies to the representative elected from a lower-level circle to a higher-level circle.

    Everybody elects people for certain roles. People vote and then if you are elected they ask if you do want to do it. This election gives the power to move more fluidity to make decisions and do what you have to do.
    Description
    "Organization of the community by the community itself"

    How do we pass from the 'I' to the 'WE'.

    It was invented to evolve democracy. Created by a Quaker to move further from consensus.
  • Ferananda le 23 jan. 2012 21:05:49
    Other resources
    Sources about sociocracy http://www.sociocracy.info/
    principles
    Sociocracy was built upon the question of 'how can we make decisions that take care of the needs of everyone involved?'

    Looking for deeper democracy. Focus in the people to integrate and come together. Human-centered values.

    1. Decision Making by Consent: Consent is a method of decision-making whereby the arguments presented in discussing a decision are of paramount importance, and the result of the discussion is that no one present knows of a paramount reason to continue discussion before proceeding with the proposed decision. Note: this is consent, not consensus.
    2. Circle Organization: The organization is built of a hierarchy of semi-autonomous circles. Each circle has its own aim, given by the higher-level circle, and has the authority and responsibility to execute, measure, and control its own processes to move towards its aim.
    3. Double-Linking: A lower circle is always linked to the circle above it via at least two people who belong to and take part in the decision making of both the higher circle and the lower circle. One of these links is the person with overall accountability for the lower-level circle's results, and the other is a representative elected from within the lower-level circle.
    4. Elections by Consent: People are elected to key roles exclusively by consent after open discussion (this is not a democratic majority-vote election!). Most notably, the election process applies to the representative elected from a lower-level circle to a higher-level circle.

    Everybody elects people for certain roles. People vote and then if you are elected they ask if you do want to do it. This election gives the power to move more fluidity to make decisions and do what you have to do.
    Description
    "Organization of the community by the community itself"

    How do we pass from the 'I' to the 'WE'.

    It was invented to evolve democracy. Created by a Quaker to move further from consensus.
  • Alexis le 10 jan. 2012 18:21:36
    principles
    1. Decision Making by Consent: Consent is a method of decision-making whereby the arguments presented in discussing a decision are of paramount importance, and the result of the discussion is that no one present knows of a paramount reason to continue discussion before proceeding with the proposed decision. Note: this is consent, not consensus.
    2. Circle Organization: The organization is built of a hierarchy of semi-autonomous circles. Each circle has its own aim, given by the higher-level circle, and has the authority and responsibility to execute, measure, and control its own processes to move towards its aim.
    3. Double-Linking: A lower circle is always linked to the circle above it via at least two people who belong to and take part in the decision making of both the higher circle and the lower circle. One of these links is the person with overall accountability for the lower-level circle's results, and the other is a representative elected from within the lower-level circle.
    4. Elections by Consent: People are elected to key roles exclusively by consent after open discussion (this is not a democratic majority-vote election!). Most notably, the election process applies to the representative elected from a lower-level circle to a higher-level circle.
    Distinctions
    The aim of sociocracy is inclusive decision-making because it has proven to be more effective. Both consensus and consent are collaborative processes that result in unified, harmonious actions. There are, however, two valuable distinctions:
    (1) The cognitive difference between asking for "agreement" and asking for "no objections" is profound. Consensus facilitators are more likely to be searching for agreement. Sociocratic facilitators specifically look for objections within defined parameters. Asking for agreement affects the perception of participants, often adversely, and influences the kinds of solutions they will propose or accept. To hone a good decision, all the objections must be examined carefully.
    (2) Consensus is specifically a decision-making process and as such is heavily dependent on the skills of the facilitator and the experience of the group. Groups using consensus have no predictable structure for the execution of decisions and must design their own, often building on structures designed to support majority vote decision-making and based on parliamentary procedure. The sociocratic governance structure is specifically designed to support inclusive decision-making and is based on principles derived from cybernetics, systems theory, and complexity theory from which the concept of consent is also derived. Thus the theory base of sociocratic governance and decision-making is more consistent. Good article about this distinctions at:
    http://www.communicatingwithcompassion.org/content/consent%20and%20consensus.htm
    Rules / Process
    system" as having three rules:
    "First, the interests of all members must be considered, the individual bowing to the interests of the whole.
    Second, no action can be taken if there are no solutions found that everyone can accept.
    Third, all members must be ready to act according to these unanimous decisions."
  • Ferananda le 10 jan. 2012 18:05:25
    Editeur
    public
    Visibilité
    public
  • Ferananda le 8 jan. 2012 01:11:02
    Distinctions
    The aim of sociocracy is inclusive decision-making because it has proven to be more effective. Both consensus and consent are collaborative processes that result in unified, harmonious actions. There are, however, two valuable distinctions: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: (1) The cognitive difference between asking for "agreement" and asking for "no objections" is profound. Consensus facilitators are more likely to be searching for agreement. Sociocratic facilitators specifically look for objections within defined parameters. Asking for agreement affects the perception of participants, often adversely, and influences the kinds of solutions they will propose or accept. To hone a good decision, all the objections must be examined carefully. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: (2) Consensus is specifically a decision-making process and as such is heavily dependent on the skills of the facilitator and the experience of the group. Groups using consensus have no predictable structure for the execution of decisions and must design their own, often building on structures designed to support majority vote decision-making and based on parliamentary procedure. The sociocratic governance structure is specifically designed to support inclusive decision-making and is based on principles derived from cybernetics, systems theory, and complexity theory from which the concept of consent is also derived. Thus the theory base of sociocratic governance and decision-making is more consistent. Good article about this distinctions at: http://www.communicatingwithcompassion.org/content/consent%20and%20consensus.htm
    Valeur modifiée non visible
    Rules / Process
    system" as having three rules: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "First, the interests of all members must be considered, the individual bowing to the interests of the whole. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Second, no action can be taken if there are no solutions found that everyone can accept. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Third, all members must be ready to act according to these unanimous decisions."
  • Ferananda le 30 déc. 2011 07:06:50
    principles
    1. Decision Making by Consent: Consent is a method of decision-making whereby the arguments presented in discussing a decision are of paramount importance, and the result of the discussion is that no one present knows of a paramount reason to continue discussion before proceeding with the proposed decision. Note: this is consent, not consensus. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 2. Circle Organization: The organization is built of a hierarchy of semi-autonomous circles. Each circle has its own aim, given by the higher-level circle, and has the authority and responsibility to execute, measure, and control its own processes to move towards its aim. .::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 3. Double-Linking: A lower circle is always linked to the circle above it via at least two people who belong to and take part in the decision making of both the higher circle and the lower circle. One of these links is the person with overall accountability for the lower-level circle's results, and the other is a representative elected from within the lower-level circle. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::4. Elections by Consent: People are elected to key roles exclusively by consent after open discussion (this is not a democratic majority-vote election!). Most notably, the election process applies to the representative elected from a lower-level circle to a higher-level circle.
  • Ferananda le 30 déc. 2011 06:49:20
    Mode
    70
    Nom
    Sociocracy
    Visibilité
    unlisted
    Editeur
    ferananda-11gmj7ai
    Catégorie
    people
Retourner à: Sociocracy