I drive consensus in one-on-ones, not meetings

Group meetings are where decisions get derailed, not made. Put a real disagreement in front of an audience and people defend positions instead of changing them. Ego shows up. The quiet person with the right objection stays quiet.

So I do the work before the meeting. One-on-ones, individually, with each person who has a stake. I find out where they actually stand, what they are worried about, what would change their mind. I let them push back in private, where it is cheap.

By the time we are in the room together, the debate already happened. The meeting confirms a direction we mostly agree on, captures it in writing, and assigns owners. Short meeting. No surprises.

This is slower up front and faster everywhere else. The alternative, a surprise debate in front of ten people, feels efficient because it is one meeting. It is not efficient. It is how you get a decision that nobody owns and everybody relitigates.

Pre-align individually. Then bring it to the group.