Not usually. And I doubt consensus would work well in our society. However, in a small to medium sized group that needs to function over a long term, it has many other benefits.

Primarily the inclusion of everyone in decisions. It keeps tensions from building and virtually eliminates the creation of a pecking order which can become so decisive. Which is why I brought it up in response to the original post.

Also, since everyone participates, they all know the reasoning behind the decision. This leads to more individualized action that supports the goal.

This leaderless process also is difficult to defeat. Since all understand the goal and have bought into it, there is no key individual (except for skills). Therefore if some are injured etc, the process continues.

The Rand Corp. did a study of consensus (also called mesh or web) decision group types and found that when the two methods (top down vs consensus) conflicted (warfare) the consensus group always won. This is what makes asymmetrical warfare so difficult.

Sorry about running on so, that is probably far more than you wanted to know.

Nomad