"Consensus decision-making is a group decision making process that seeks not only the agreement of most participants but also the resolution or mitigation of minority objections"
If LEED is updated by consensus why does the AP credit require the specialty? It seemed from the first public comment phase that a majority of people did not want the change to require AP's with specialty. This appears to be contrary to the intent of this process.
How do public comments fit into the Consensus process? Are the TAG members the only one's whos views are considered during consensus? Or does a single public comment have the same weight as a TAG member's opinion?
Nadav Malin
CEOBuildingGreen, Inc.
LEEDuser Moderator
844 thumbs up
September 12, 2011 - 5:14 pm
Hi Bill,If they let a majority of comments dictate the results, any group with the ability to rally a large number of followers would be in control of LEED. Committees have to weigh in and make decisions, I believe.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5906 thumbs up
September 12, 2011 - 5:27 pm
Consensus decision-making and the number of public comments on a particular issue is not necessarily the same thing. Suppose that a particular company doesn't like how LEED treats their product. They could flood the public comments with many "votes". If we gave everyone a vote I would guess that LEED would barely change at all as inertia is a very powerful thing.
The public comments are taken into account as the credit language evolves. Many public comments have had significant impact on specific credit language and intent. The TAGs and other USGBC committees will spend the next two or three months reviewing them and revising the credit language.
In some cases a TAG member’s opinions do carry more weight than a public comment as they are the ones spending hundreds, or in some case thousands of volunteer hours working on these issues as vetted subject matter experts. Like all human deliberations consensus-making results from innumerable influences and the public comments are just one of those means for influencing the development of LEED. Other influences and opinions include USGBC Board, staff, other (non-TAG) USGBC committees, influential users, writers of standards adopted by LEED, and many, many others. Of course there are politics, both internal and external, at play until every committee and the USGBC Board signs off; then the USGBC membership votes.
As in almost all human enterprises of any size not all voices carry the same weight. Consensus decision-making simply means that everyone is given an opportunity to voice their opinion and a consensus develops through the process weighing all those influences.
Bill Swanson
Sr. Electrical EngineerIntegrated Design Solutions
LEEDuser Expert
734 thumbs up
September 14, 2011 - 1:40 pm
I understand that majority rule can be stacked by a company. I just hear USGBC toute this process as consensus based so often when it really isn't. I'd rather it was science based and a good idea can be adopted regardless of source or quantity of voices. Just don't call it consensus if it's not.
But I also think that manufacturing companies have been stacking regulatory boards and having Code updates that cost building owners millions. (Why would the existing roof insulation have to be removed when doing an EPDM reroof? Why does an above countertop receptacle need to be childproof.) I'm am concerned that LEED has become the newest target. Reading comments in the MR sections seems to show others feel that way too. Is there any sort of contract that volunteers are required to sign that when working on LEED business they're actions are for the benefit of LEED and not their employeer?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5906 thumbs up
September 15, 2011 - 9:17 am
I would still argue that it is consensus based as various constituencies get to have their say and then the ultimate decision is put to a vote of the membership. I suppose we could vote on every issue but that does not seem practical.
There is a conflict of interest policy and as I recall committee members are required to read it and sign. Here is the committee policy.
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=1905