Skip Maine state header navigation

Agencies | Online Services | Help
State of Maine Seal
  
Background
Consensus-Based Stakeholder Processes
Mediation of Disputes Involving State Agencies
Related Web Sites
Public Policy Consensus & Mediation: State of Maine Best Practices

Key Steps of a Consensus Process

  1. How to do an internal agency’s assessment
  2. How to do an external stakeholder’s assessment
  3. How to select and work with a facilitator or mediator
  4. Establishing a representative group
  5. Establishing ground rules
  6. Disclosing timing and funding constraints
  7. Phases of work
  8. Finalizing the Agreement

Key Step 1: Internal Agency Assessment

The first step is to determine whether a consensus process is feasible or likely to waste time and energy. Some agencies try to economize by skipping the assessment stage, but experience shows that this initial diagnosis is an essential part of the process. The first step is to conduct an "internal assessment".

Because some issues lend themselves to consensus and others do not, it actually wastes resources to proceed without first determining whether the situation is ripe for reaching consensus. There are two parts to an assessment:

  1. The agency’s assessment - determining whether the agency is willing to use consensus, and if it is,
  2. The stakeholders’ assessment - discussing the prospects for consensus with the other stakeholders before proceeding.


ASSESS the agency's objectives

  • What is the agency's mandate in this matter? What action is the agency required to take? What decisions does the agency need to make?
  • Does the agency's mandate permit a range of solutions?
  • What are the options for making the decisions? If the agency makes a decision without the support of affected parties, what is likely to happen? Might the decision be appealed or difficult to enforce?
  • Is the agency willing to share control of the process and formulation of the decision?
  • Does the agency have the time and resources to support a consensus process?
  • Might the decision be better if the affected parties help to develop it?

ASSESS the situation based on agency's knowledge:

  • Do the issues appear to be negotiable?
  • Are the interests clearly defined?
  • Are the issues a priority for stakeholders?
  • Is there enough time for parties to deliberate (or is it an emergency situation)?
  • Alternatively, is there a deadline "pushing" a decision that will provide a helpful defined time frame for the process?
  • Who are the parties? Is there a relative balance of power or do some have better alternatives than negotiating that might be more attractive than reaching consensus?
  • If issues of race, class, culture, and ethnicity could make it difficult for parties to participate on equal footing, what can be done to overcome those differences?
  • Are any of the parties framing the issue as one of rights or asserting a fundamental principle they consider to be non-negotiable?
  • Are any of the parties seeking to clarify a legal question or establish a legal precedent?
  • Is it likely that political leaders will support a process?
  • What are the relationships among the parties? Is there a history of conflict or is this issue a one-time occurrence?
  • Do the parties have political influence that would help the agency implement the decision? For example is funding from the legislature necessary?
  • Will implementation require the ongoing effort of many parties? Should the agency try to achieve an agreement that will lay the foundation for productive collaboration?