Over a long long time, I have been noticing that not only in the corporate world but also in political circles, almost all decisions are taken unanimously. Even a note or reference to dissent expressed by a member is tried to be avoided in the proceedings, if and when they are minuted.

That is fantastic isn’t it ? But we all know that in reality the situations are quite different. I tend to believe that to disagree or to have another point of view is always seen as a dissent. There is therefore a constant effort to avoid conflict within a group as far as it is possible. Unanimity is seen as democratic and not dictatorial, quite surprisingly .

Unanimity is somehow brought about as a face saver after many hidden stitches which are bound to break at the first opportunity.

Why such a psychology or mind set ? This is becoming a typical stand, to avoid conflicts even where they are inevitable. The well known Kalinga ( Ashok’s preachings thereafter ) effect has become a way of life. The preaching of Ashoka to maintain peace and harmony are certainly laudable but it does not mean that healthy differences should be overruled. One of the outcomes of overruling the opposite view is that the differing / overruled party / persons resort to non co-operation which is a fatal tool to be used against enemies and Gandhiji used it effectively against Britishers. But within a society or within an organization, it is detriment to its growth and development.

In short, the art of obtaining genuine unanimity lies in recognizing the beauty of diversity and actively embracing different views and opinions. Somehow, at any cost, the efforts to get unanimity leads to dictatorial regime rather than democratic regime. Stitch unanimity by thinking by open mind, transparent behavior and mutual trust. It is dangerous to resort to double standards and lack of transparency. At the same time, the differing parties also should not pre-plan, backstabbing, non-cooperation and turncoat approach.