Casting Your Vote: 8 Decision-Making Techniques to Minimize Conflict

Practical approaches to help family stakeholders avoid hard feelings and get things done

Byline: Doug Baumoel

Estimated read time:~4-5 minutes

Disagreements over important issues in family businesses can lead to conflict and resentment if not handled well. Reaching consensus is challenging because fairness means different things depending on the stakeholder’s role. For example:

  • Owners may interpret fairness as proportional treatment
  • Employees might see fairness as merit- or rank-based
  • Family members often view fairness as need-based

Because fairness can’t always be objectively defined, families often focus on achieving an outcome through a fair decision-making process.

When stakeholders perceive that a fair process was followed, they are more likely to accept the outcome—even if it’s not what they originally wanted. One common approach is calling a vote.

Voting, however, doesn’t always appear like a fair approach to all. There’s always a winner and a loser unless the vote is unanimous. Families can minimize potential conflicts by choosing the right voting technique for each situation. Below are several methods that promote thoughtful decision-making, build trust, and improve acceptance of outcomes. These techniques can be used independently or combined based on the needs of your family or business.

1. Consensus Voting

Consensus-building requires effort but can be worth it. It’s not about locking everyone in a room until they agree. Instead, it’s a structured discussion that helps identify where stakeholders stand on an issue. Stakeholders are grouped into five categories:

  1. Wholeheartedly agree
  2. Good idea – Some suggestions
  3. Will support – “Can live with this”
  4. Have serious concerns – Some modification needed
  5. Definite no – Must block it

The first three groups are considered “above the line”, indicating they can move forward. The fourth and fifth groups are “below the line,” meaning they block progress unless changes are made.

Those who are ‘below the line’ are given the responsibility of suggesting what needs to change for them to agree to move forward. This framing allows dissenters to voice their opinions, reducing conflict by avoiding confrontations where others try to argue or convince them they are wrong. Instead, it focuses on understanding what needs to change to bring them on board. Importantly, this doesn’t mean asking them what must change to love the decision, but what changes would allow them to agree to move forward—helping them get ‘above the line.’

This technique encourages creative problem-solving and collaboration, aiming for a decision that all stakeholders can live with.

A straw poll gauges the general sentiment of the group before holding a formal vote. It can help identify potential roadblocks, determine if the vote should be postponed, or highlight areas needing more discussion. Think of it as a low-pressure way to take the group’s temperature before initiating formal decision-making. This technique reduces the risk of premature votes that could polarize the group.

Anonymous voting allows participants to express their true opinions without fear of judgment or backlash. Votes are collected confidentially (e.g., via a ballot box or an anonymous electronic system), and a trusted party counts the results. This technique encourages honesty and transparency, especially in situations where some participants may feel uncomfortable expressing dissent publicly.

When decision-making rests with a small group, such as a Board of Directors, expanding the vote to include a broader group can build credibility and acceptance. While some decisions (e.g., strategic plans) may only require board approval, others (e.g., changes to shareholder agreements) may need input from all stakeholders. Adjusting the voting group fosters inclusivity and can lead to more thoughtful outcomes.

For complex or divisive issues, it can be useful to break the decision into smaller parts. This approach, known as fractional voting, allows stakeholders to reach consensus on individual elements of a larger issue. Finding “islands of agreement” enables stakeholders to move forward with at least some of their issues, which can lead to a lowering of tensions, increased trust, and a path towards a larger agreement.

Time-bounding allows a decision to take effect for a limited period, after which it must be reevaluated. If the decision proves effective, it can be reaffirmed through another vote. If not, the group can adjust or abandon the decision. This approach encourages experimentation and provides flexibility.

For high-stakes decisions, a simple majority may not be enough. Supermajority voting requires a higher threshold—such as 60% or 75% approval—to move forward. This technique ensures that decisions have broad support, reducing the risk of alienating stakeholders.

Ranked choice voting is ideal when multiple options are on the table. Voters rank their preferences (first choice, second choice, etc.). If no option receives over 50% of first-choice votes, the option with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the remaining votes shift upward. This process continues until a choice achieves a majority.

Ranked choice voting minimizes the influence of spoilers—candidates or options that might siphon votes from others—and ensures that the final decision has broad support, even if it’s not everyone’s top choice. Voters can express their true preferences, knowing their vote will still count if their first choice is eliminated.

Breaking a Deadlock

These techniques can also be helpful when breaking a deadlock. For example, a board of directors can open a tie-breaking vote to a larger group or decide to time-bound the decision. Use of these eight voting approaches allow the group to move forward while keeping all stakeholders engaged.

Time and Place Matter

The timing and environment of a vote can affect its outcome. Avoid holding votes during times of heightened tension. Using neutral locations or electronic voting methods can also create a safer environment for decision-making and compromise.

Conclusion

While voting can create divisions, it’s sometimes necessary. Choosing the right voting technique helps ensure that all stakeholders feel fairly treated and willing to accept the outcome. Thoughtful processes build trust, reduce conflict, and pave the way for better decision-making.

We hope this overview provides useful insights into effective voting techniques. If you need further guidance, Continuity experts are ready to help your family improve decision-making and move forward with confidence.

Get Started Today

About Us

Continuity Family Business Consulting is a leading advisory firm for enterprising families. Using a full suite of service capabilities, we help families prevent and manage the single greatest threat to family and business continuity: conflict. It is through this lens that we advise our clients and build customized strategies for succession planning, corporate governance, family governance, and more. We help families improve decision making, maximize potential and achieve continuity. To inquire, visit https://continuityfbc.com/contact-us or call (617) 500-3110.