How Decisions Are Made

We make decisions sociocratically, by consent, either in a meeting or on Twist. The rules below describe how that works in practice, asynchronously, on Twist.

We don't try to define the threshold of where a sociocratic decision needs to be made in advance. In our experience, this isn't something we get wrong. There is a shared sense of what sort of decisions require consent from members and across the co-op, and this is enough. The rule of thumb being: this is a change that affects more than me and more than at a project level, and/or uses the co-operative's financial and other resources.

Proposals

Proposals can be added to the Proposals channel in Twist.

The first message on the thread should always contain the version of the proposal on which consent is sought.

Time limits

By default, decisions have a seven-day time limit, measured from the time the proposal is posted on Twist.

• If all members consent to a decision, it passes. Regardless of whether the time limit has been reached.
• If members don't reply to a decision by the time limit, it passes.

Members can set a shorter time limit if they wish. However, any member can object to a shortened time limit and extend it. Preferably a time limit should not be less than 24 hours.

A time limit longer than seven days cannot be set, though members can always extend decision-making time by not consenting to the decision.

If a decision is of high consequence and on a shortened timeline, the proposer needs to actively solicit the views of all members.

When a decision takes effect

Every proposal has a deadline, or an implicit deadline of seven days. Once that deadline passes and the proposal has been consented to, it is implemented as soon as possible from that point. For example, if a proposal's deadline is 17:00 on Thursday 21st of May, the policy takes effect on that date and is implemented as soon as is practical.

A proposal can propose its own implementation date, which overrides this default.

Members on leave

If members are on leave and the decision is significant, or existential, then best efforts must be made to contact them. Otherwise:

• If a member is away or on holiday, they can specify certain classes of decision they want to be asked about. This needs to be explicit, and the default should be that other members are trusted to make most decisions in their absence.
• If a member is ill, similarly, they can specify (as a general rule) certain classes of decision they want to be contacted about. This needs to be explicit.

Members can decide to try and reverse a decision when they return to work by making a counter-proposal.

Participation and consent

Non-members are welcome to participate, but their consent is purely indicative. There are two exceptions. The first is where the decision concerns them, along the lines of the phrase "no decision about me, without me". The second is where the proposer proposes to widen the scope of decision-making to include non-members, and members consent to this.

Members can ask clarifying questions, as per the standard sociocratic rounds.

When not giving consent, members must give their reasons.

For proposals that do not achieve consent, the proposer can work out an alternative proposal and re-propose it, or set the proposal aside.

The minimum number of members who can make any decision is two.

Automation

We will create automations that assist these rules.