Last week, I returned to business travel^[1]. I have had several opportunities come up to return to my globetrotting^[2] ways. I have resisted. Not so much from fear but from the thought that I should be home as the school year ends and we start a new chapter^[3] in our lives this summer.

This trip, I needed to be there. I had two big presentations to make. I was quite scared about one of them, because it touched on philosophy more than engineering. I was attempting to get everyone in the group to have a little more understanding of each other and a little less judgement when someone had a different opinion^[4].

I opened with an allegory about Apples. I said that a few weeks ago, I was talking with one of the members of the group. Let’s call her Sam. I asked if she wanted an apple. I had some extras. Sam’s eyes got big and a smile graced her face. She said she would love an apple. Was I really going to give one away? I looked at her, confused, and said sure! I didn’t want them to go bad. Sam looked at me confused and asked if I hadn’t been doing regular OS updates.

I was talking about honey crips. She was thinking of an iMac.

That did not happen. But, what did happen is this: About two weeks ago I was talking with Sam. Sam has been writing this type of standard for about 25 years. She is a leader in the group, and she kept asking me when we were going to vote^[5]. I was very confused. I said, “We don’t vote.” Well, we don’t vote. I could not understand why Sam felt we had to vote to gain consensus. It seemed like a lot of unnecessary overhead^[6]. She could not understand how I could say we would reach consensus without voting^[7].

To me, voting is the opposite of consensus. It implies majority^[8] rules. To Sam, there was no way to know you were even close to consensus without lots of binding votes along the way. For my organization, consensus is getting to something you can live with. You might vote against it, but you are ok to accept the alternative^[9]. If you must.

I suppose, though I hate to admit it, we both had a point. The way Sam was familiar with to get to consensus worked. So why would anyone not follow that process? The way I lead^[10] my groups now and the processes my organization^[11] wants us to use – they also work. So why would I tell them they have to vote on the meaning of apples and accept that is the only thing it can mean when we say apples?

The real problem isn’t the method that is chosen. The problem is we both thought our method was the only way to reach consensus functionally^[12]. And the two methods, while not mutually exclusive, were difficult to reconcile since neither of us thought there was anything wrong with our method^[13].

I know that I have my own perceptions, experiences, and expectations. When I forget that the way I want something done isn’t the only way^[14], it makes everything harder. Including communicating with people I really want to agree with me. What is the hidden thing that made the bias in my mind towards fruit and the bias in Sam’s mind towards computers?

I think it is design decisions. I believe everyone (at least in the US) is the Systems Architect^[15] of their life. And as the architect, they get to make the design decisions. Sometimes, my design decisions come from my parents and grandparents^[16]. Or, perhaps it comes from the community I was raised in. Pizza is good when it is made the way I like it. I like it because that was the pizza I ate when I was a kid and I remember it being yummy^[17].

It is so easy to give into misunderstanding. To be tempted to associate with a we and identify a them^[18] to reject.

So, as I eat an apple sitting at my iMac^[19], I think I will remember that everything I encounter influences my design decisions. And I will also be grateful we are going back out into the world interacting with each other once again.

The trip was good. I didn’t change anyone’s mind with the presentation, and that wouldn’t have been the point anyway. I did help people see that we weren’t seeing the same thing when we talked about getting to consensus with each other. So maybe, hopefully, potentially, we could reach consensus someday.

---

^[1] I did not check a bag. More on that later.

^[2] Really, just to Europe and back mostly. Although, I did get to go to Japan once.

^[3] BigOne is graduating from High School. LittleOne starts High School. I think I mentioned that 2022 seems to be a significant year for milestones for many people I know.

^[4] We call that consensus, but that is a different LfZ.

^[5] We don’t vote. We consense. Again, that is a different letter.

^[6] And my job is to provide that overhead, among other things.

^[7] Ok, I guess it must be this letter after all. I need to provide some context it appears.

^[8] Or a supermajority if you are in the senate.

^[9] Like a primary election maybe?

^[10] From behind.

^[11] Especially my boss.

^[12] And I suspect we both also think the other way is dysfunctional.

^[13] In fact, my boss and my coworkers think there is something wrong with the voting method. But that one really is another LfZ.

^[14] Except with BigOne and LittleOne. In that case my way IS the only way. Or so I would like to think.

^[15] Back to Systems engineering. 

^[16] For example, were you raised in a religion? I was. And the choice to stay with that religion or go another way – it is a design decision.

^[17] Or crappy. See, the design decision I make is based on my experience and if it was a positive experience.

^[18] The other them. Not the non-binary singular third person pronoun.

^[19] Apocryphal. Though, I am sitting at my Mac writing this.