Historically, men have relied upon leaders to make decisions for them, even in the home. Women prefer to travel in packs, relying on consensus instead—everyone is heard and no one gets left out.
Just watch five women deciding on a restaurant. They’ll discuss it for 20 minutes, getting everything they know out, and then settle on someplace where everyone is happy. Men in this instance take less than five seconds. “Where do you want to go, Chuck?” “Well, I saw a steak house back there.” “Okay, okay, okay, okay.”
Men get frustrated by the female style, considering it inefficient. They think it takes way too long (though it usually does produce better results). Women feel the male style leads to control freaks—leaning too heavily on just one person’s preference or opinion. Today, the ladies have won out and the consensus model has become norm. But without a specified leader, balls tend to get dropped. So instead of replacing the old style, we should have morphed the two.
The best method for decision making still involves having a leader because consensus isn’t always right. Consensus doesn’t force the suffering and individual responsibility of true leadership. And it doesn’t force someone to see things through to the very end. Quality has always required great amounts of concentration but within a consensus model no one ever gets that committed. Granted the old leadership role had flaws, so let’s change it. Modern leaders should act more like facilitators, respecting the positions of consensus but continuing to add the components of suffering, personal responsibility, and nursing projects to the end.
What’s best for quality is that we forsake the issue of stepping on each other’s toes and allow one person to take charge. Not everyone can be respected all the time. Maybe we should take turns playing leader, or we could split projects into smaller sections led by pod captains. I don’t know, let’s vote on it.