Clarify Individual vs Consensus Decisions

Version 1
IVCD Map
Clarify together what deserves
consensus and what should be
decided autonomously

Summary of the IVCD Map
1. Presentation of the "Individual or Consensus" concept
2. The IVCD Map tool
3. Using IVCD map as a team workshop
4. Using IVCD map in an Onboarding process
5. Using IVCD map between 2 teams
6. 🎓Training on IVCD map
7. Limitations and extensions of the IVCD Map

Concept
Decision by the individual vs Consensus

Some common situations
You find yourself alone in front
of a subject that is new to you
and to the team.
A decision must be made to
move forward on this issue.
This decision may impact
several other people, but
these people also have other
priorities.
Are you calling your team or
are you going to start alone?

You are looking to make a
decision on a particular topic,
but that topic may affect other
people.
Recently, there have also been
many complaints about the
increase in the number of
emails, solicitations and
meetings.
How do you choose between
contacting massively and
starting on your own until you
know more?

You have recently experienced
several frustrations in the
department about "not being
in the loop".
However, you are facing an
operational emergency, a
difficulty to find a common
availability before a certain
time.
How do you know if this is
the right time/topic to
convene people, or if you
should go for it alone?

The question behind these situations
AGENT NON-AGENTS
All these situations involve an AGENT who may or may not decide
to act, and (known or unknown) NON-AGENTS who could
contribute to deciding on the action (or non-action)

Should I
ACT ALONE or AGREE BEFORE?
The question behind these situations

Acting quickly on your own or agreeing
beforehand
ACT QUICKLY ON YOUR OWN AGREE BEFOREHAND
Prioritize rapid action and decision
• Decision by the first possible person
(who has the authority or
opportunity)
• Assumption of consensus by default
("When in doubt, I assume they agree
with me")
Prioritize ownership of the decision
• Decision by the group
• Assumption of usefulness of consensus
("Taking time to agree is better than
acting quickly in this situation")
(Possible)
Post-decision review
"At worst, we'll discuss
it again"
Act
"It has to be done and it
has to be done now"
(Optional)
Inform about the action
at the beginning or at
the end "Here is the
action I have started".
Take the time to set the
terms of the decision
"Let's get the options
straight
Agreeing on a
consensus
"Let's agree"
Act and make the
decision collectively
responsible
"It is the will of the
group

The benefits of each modality
I like the
freedom I have
and the fact
that I don't
have to ask for
too much
rights
It is more
reassuring (and
we will all assume
better) if we agree
beforehand
AGENT AGENT

The benefits of each modality
We feel involved
in all decisions
and therefore
more significant
I like it when
people work on
their own
without asking
me for too much
validation
NON-AGENT NON-AGENT

As a Non-Agent, possible reactions
Why wasn't I
in the loop?
We are still
being called for
little matters,
can't they
manage it on
their own?
NON-AGENT NON-AGENT

As an Agent, the difficulties of being "forced" to choose
a modality
Why do we still
need a big
consensus for
such a small
decision?
Why do I have to
make this
decision alone?
AGENT AGENT

Act quickly on your own or come to an agreement beforehand
Advantages and disadvantages
Quickness to act
No dependence on
the heaviness of the
consensus
Greater freedom to
test and feeling of
freedom
Risk that non agents
feel that they have
been left out
Risk of haste and
errors
Time is taken for the
agreement
Everyone feels
involved
Less risk of
disagreement
Involving some people
can be cumbersome,
impossible or blocking
Slowness to act
Risk of disagreement
after actions happen,
can be damaging to
relationships
Systematic
involvement can
remove the feeling
of freedom
Openness to
serendipity
Global vision Less serendipity
Lack of global vision

Favourable conditions that invite one modality or another
High trust in decision
makers (agent)
Taste for rapid action, for
"test and learn”
Decision-makers / Agents
very isolated from each
other
Inaction is uncomfortable
for the decision-maker but
harmless for others
Limited time and resources
for the consensus process
High trust in the usefulness
of consensus
Taste for collective thinking,
"learn together then test”
Decision-makers are very
close to each other
Inaction is uncomfortable
enough for all decision
makers (agent and non-
agents)
Time and resources are
available for consensus
Distrust in the benefits of
group decision
Distrust in individual
decision making
In case of error, the cost of
reworking is low
In case of error, the cost of
reworking is high
Decision-makers/agents
have sufficient information
and competence to decide
and act on their own
Decision-makers / agents do
not have enough
information and
competence to act alone
Other members are not
considered to have the
information/competence to
decide
Non-agents are considered
to have the
information/competence to
decide

Acting quickly on your own or coming to an agreement
beforehand
Examples of situations
An agent is faced with an operational
emergency, the other members are
not available, he/she quickly acts
alone
One agent has to make a decision that
may significantly impact all the others,
he/she asks for consensus
An agent must make a choice whose
consequences have almost no impact
on non-agents, he/she quickly acts
alone
It is necessary to decide on a standard
(e.g. standard material) of the
collective, which will be applied for
existing and new members. A
consensus is sought

IVCD Map Tool
How do we write down decisions about "what should be autonomous" and "what
should be collectively agreed"?

Acting quickly on your own or agreeing beforehand
Practical workshop: Individual vs Consensus decision (IVCD) map
Decisions that
are best made
alone
The IVCD Map
allows a collective
to pose and agree
on the types of
decisions for which
it is best to "decide
alone", and the
types of decisions
on which to seek
consensus, as well
as the "case-by-
case" gray area
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as
a group
Grey area
(case by
case)
The IVCD Map sets
out the framework
of individual
liberties, that of
collective
responsibility, and
identifies the "more
difficult" cases to
remain vigilant on.

IVCD map - Example of results
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Example use case
A Community of Practice
(around management topics)
wishes to develop autonomy
of its members.
They use the IVCD map to
make different types of
decisions that they consider
more individual, consensual
or "case by case" for their
culture
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as
a group
Grey area
(case by
case)
Bringing a new
member into the
Community
Ban a member of
the Community
Choose your
computer brand
Define the
schedules of the
Community's
appointments
Promote the
community to an
outsider
Initiate contact
with another
member
Publish content in
the community

Acting quickly alone or agreeing beforehand
When to use the IVCD map in a collective ?
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as a
group
Grey area
(case by
case)
ONBOARDING:
To help new members
better understand
their freedoms.
WHEN THE COLLECTIVE
GROWS/DECREASES IN
NUMBERS:
To adjust the level of freedom
to the number, or to different
constraints.
IN CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT SESSION:
To adjust the level of
freedom to the actual
experience and inputs of
the group
AFTER SIGNIFICANT
CHANGES IN
GOVERNANCE:
To clarify how autonomy
and consensus are
adjusted

The benefits of the proper use of the IVCD Map
We are less likely to
be taken by surprise
I have a better
understanding of my
freedoms
There is less risk of
redundant work in our
collective.
When we are in a
meeting, it is more
often for a subject
that actually
deserves a meeting
I have less fear of
upsetting others
because I would not
have asked them
I feel more
comfortable asking for
help when I need it
There is less chance of
a last-minute
slowdown due to
requirement of
consensus
NON-AGENTS
AGENTS
Clearer autonomy
Psychological safety
Speed of action
Better relationships
and coordination
Better use of
collective time
Greater
opportunities for
mutualization

Display the IVCD Map differently
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as a
group
Grey area
(case by
case)
The IVCD Map has a particular visual presentation (two intersecting circles) that facilitates its use in
visual workshops. The content can be presented differently according to individual preferences and
situations.
There is no need to force one format or the other, despite the name "MAP". The important thing is to
find an effective display format for presenting the information
In full
autonomy
Case by case Collective
decision
• Lorem
• Ipsum
• Lorem
• Ipsum
• Lorem
• Ipsum
In full autonomy
• Lorem Ipsum
• Lorem Ipsum
Case by case
• Lorem Ipsum
• Lorem Ipsum
Collective decisions
• Lorem Ipsum
• Lorem Ipsum
2 CIRCLES VIEW TABLE VIEW TEXT VIEW

Using the IVCD Map as a team
workshop

This workshop follows #OpenSeriousGame recommendations
It is made so that you can transmit
it after playing it
All the material to promote it, to
animate it, to adapt it, to create
variants is at your disposal.
It's up to you to play, and one day :
It will be to you to train other
people!

The IVCD Map in a nutshell
Participants are introduced to the concept of arbitrating
between acting quickly on their own and agreeing
beforehand (can also be sent in advance of a workshop).
An example of use of the IVCD Map is shown
Each participant writes down the topics they consider
important for the discussion (those for which autonomy
or systematic consensus is unsatisfactory for example)
In turn, each participant proposes ONE topic and
discusses it with others until the area is fixed.
The next participant is then given the floor.
To get an
idea of how
this
workshop
works
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as a
group
Grey area
(case by
case)

Level 2: IVCD Map Workshop Details
Opening:
Home, Intro,
Icebreaker, ...
Course of action
Game rules, Narrative
Closing:
Debriefing, Thanks,
...
10 min.
Participants are introduced
to the concept of arbitrating
between acting quickly on
their own and agreeing
beforehand (can also be
sent in advance of a
workshop).
An example of use of the
IVCD Map is shown
5 min Preparation
Each participant create notes from the subjects they consider important for discussion in IVCD map (one note per
topic)
The noted subjects are those for which participants consider that it is better to act quickly or that it is better to agree
beforehand. These are typically
the subjects on which one would like to have fewer meetings, more freedom,
or on the contrary "to be in the loop", or "to be consulted".
1 to 3 subjects max per person or 10 subjects max for all a 1h workshop.
The wording of the topics must be well-written enough to be discussed
• Ideal formulation of a subject: Action verb - Complement: "Update the instruction sheets". This formulation
facilitates the decision because it is clear to imagine it
• Bad formulation of a subject: A single word or theme "SEO", this formulation makes it difficult to decide because it
covers too many types of actions
30 minutes Presentation of topics and discussion
In turn, each participant shares about one of his/her chosen subjects (one of the tickets he or she has written).
Together, the participants then decide whether it is a subject that
- can be decided on alone,
- is better to seek consensus (at least 2 people),
- will be on a case-by-case basis.
There can be a lot of discussion or very little on each subject, the important thing is that participants ask themselves
what they prefer as a collective: to boost autonomy, collective alignment, or case by case. Note that a lot of "case by
case" can be heavy in the long run.
Participants cover as many tickets as possible in 30 minutes, and can extend the workshop if needed.
15 minutes
Discussion on:
• Where to record the
results (onboarding
booklet, team wiki,
etc.)
• When to re-discuss
these decisions
• Who to share the
results with
• Other topics we would
like to discuss next
time
Total :
1h

Level 3: IVCD Map Organization
🎓Instructional Objectives
At the end of the training, the participants
must :
1. Have understood the advantages and
disadvantages of acting quickly on your
own or seeking consensus
2. Have identified key situations where the
current level of autonomy or consensus is
problematic (and can be improved)
3. Have practiced IVCD map as a tool
🎯Objectives
At the end of the workshop, the
participants must :
1. Have clarified the individual freedoms
of the members, Have clarified the
issues that require consensus
2. Have produced a common document
that summarizes this information
🧑🧑🧑Ideal audience.
The IVCD Map can be played out in groups
(teams, departments, transversal groups)
with people who must work together,
independently or in consultation.
Ideally, participants have an idea of what
continuous improvement is, and are
willing to share with each other with that
intention.
🛠🧑Examples of uses and
problems addressed
Growing team that needs more autonomy to avoid too
many slowdowns
Business community that wishes to develop autonomy
among its members
Collective of specialists who must cooperate and who
are unfamiliar with each other's perimeters and
expertise
Service that has just renewed its management team
(even partially) and that needs to review its processess
Topics not covered in this
workshop
Detailed roles and responsibilities
Decision-making process for anything that
requires consensus
📅Logistics
1H (with possible extension to 1H30 if
desired, longer not recommended),
Need a virtual wall used by participants, or
a physical wall with writing materials and
post-it notes
💡Ideas for complements
Delegation Poker
RACI
Scale of collective decisions
🎤Short pitch (copy and paste
into descriptions)
"I wasn't in the loop", "We have 1000 times too
many meetings"... In a collective, we sometimes
like to be consulted, but we sometimes don't like
the consultation and its consequences.
How can we reconcile these two common
situations ? By giving everyone clear, usable,
flexible and simple guidelines.
The IVCD Map is a simple, quick workshop that
help participants share and decide about these
guidelines together, in order to improve autonomy
and co-construction at the same time.

Level 5: IVCD map animation
To find out how to
facilitate the workshop
easily
It is important to remain
neutral in the presentation of
acting alone vs. agreeing
beforehand. This neutrality is
important to understand the
advantages and disadvantages
of each modality.
The IVCD Map is a tool for
continuous improvement and
not for complaints, it is
important to continue to
maintain this improvement-
oriented posture rather than
blaming-oriented posture.
⚖️Posture and introduction
It may be useful to present real-life cases where:
- The collective is happy to be able to act autonomously on certain
subjects
- The collective is happy to be in prior consensus on certain
subjects
Then, add these tickets as example tickets in each category
This addition requires knowledge of the context of the collective (e.g.
its decision meetings) and its practices.
You can adapt the examples to the context (this workshop was
created generically to be used in many contexts) to be more
meaningful.
It can be interesting to prepare these examples in advance
👨🏫Facilitation tips and tricks
Operational debriefing
• Where will we record the results of
today's workshop? With whom will
we share this information?
• When should we discuss these
decisions again? What remains to be
discussed ?
• With whom would it be interesting to
repeat this workshop?
Instructional Debriefing
• What did you learn with the IVCD map?
• In what situations might you find this
tool useful? What will you apply
• What are the limits?
• What would you complement this tool
with?
🙋Debriefing

Level 6: Adaptation of IVCD
Map
To easily adapt the workshop
and create variations
Ideas for variants
Title of the variant or extension Description
Version history
Version Contributors License Comments
1.0 Alexandre
QUACH
Thomas
FROMENT
CC-BY-3.0 First version

Onboarding use
• The IVCD Map can be presented for the onboarding of a new member of a collective (team, community, etc.)
so that the new member can better understand his or her interaction needs.
• Here is a presentation format
What you can feel
comfortable doing
independently
Case by case This will require a
collective decision (ask
someone else on the
team for details!)
• Configure your
workstation
• Decide on your
schedule
• Choose the writing
tools you prefer
• Lorem Ipsum
• Communicate outside
the team
• Launching projects in
the team
• Lorem Ipsum
• Send communications
to the hierarchy
• Make purchases on
behalf of the team
• Lorem Ipsum
Welcome among us,
here is a sheet to help
you be more
autonomous and work
better with us

Use between 2 teams
• When 2 teams have to cooperate, the same pitfalls can occur as within one team (feeling short-circuited, or depending on
the other team all the time, etc.).
• A workshop such as the IVCD Map provides a concrete framework for identifying issues of conflict, which can then be
arbitrated by the appropriate parties.
Decisions that one
team can make
without consulting the
other
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as a
group
Grey area
(case by case)
Reference points
of contact on
common topics
Tools shared by
the 2 teams
The internal tools
of each team
The organization
of the quarterly
synchronization
meeting
The recruitment
and exit of
people in each
team
Internal
processes
(meetings, etc.)
of each team
The direction
taken by each
team

🎓Training for IVCD Map
• The IVCD Map is a tool that can have multiple uses, especially in professional life groups (teams, departments, corporate communities.)
• To train on the IVCD map, here is a recommended path (from left to right):
1. Inspiration: Create
the desire
2. Collection: Make
the trainees relate to
their own work
3. Initiation: practice
the IVCD map tool
4. Reality check:
Helping with
implementation
5. Confirmation of
successes: Capitalize
6. Exhibition:
Extending a use
7. Formalization:
Systematize an
improvement
Introduce the concept
of "Acting Alone vs.
Agreeing First" and
related issues, no
mention of the IVCD
Map. (Level of detail
to be chosen freely)
Present the usefulness
of agreeing on the
categories of the IVCD
map (with the IVCD
map): gains in
autonomy and
alignment. Present
real cases if possible.
Ask the participants
questions about what
they have already
observed,
experienced, or are
experiencing as similar
situations to what is
presented in the
Inspiration phase.
Introduce the IVCD
Map tool, and apply it
to different examples
Get learners to use the
IVCD Map in their own
context before
returning to the group
to review the learning.
Discuss together the
use cases, the limits of
application of the IVCD
map
Share what is not
working, what is
blocking, and discuss
how to get around it.
Discuss together
feedback, practices
and adaptations that
have worked
Reflect on how to
capitalize on these
practices
Discuss together who
else (real and
reachable) could
benefit from the IVCD
map as a process
Identify settings where
a DCVI Map should be
routinely performed

1. Inspiration: Recommended formats
Here are the recommended
formats for the inspiration
phase (you can choose to do
them all or just one part)
- Short presentation (20
minutes) of the slides of the
dedicated section in this
document. Live or video
(asynchronous).
- Presentation of real cases
(live or video).
Live
presentations
Videos and
live debriefing
Asynchronous
videos (sent
by message or
published)

2. Collection phase: recommended contents
Depending on the level of psychological safety
between participants, i.e., their ease of sharing
with each other, they can be asked different
questions during the "Gathering" phase.
Indeed, it can be difficult for some people to
expose certain problematic situations,
difficulties, or complaints in front of others
(whether unknown or known).
However, when learning about a model, a
workshop or a method, it is often the ability to
relate with the reality of work that makes it
useful.
This page proposes different questions to ask
depending on the level of confidence between
participants.
The higher the level of trust, the more we can
work on the link with the subject
The lower it is, the more we protect the
participants and their confidentiality, while the
sharing process slowly builds trust.
Confidence level Description of the confidence level Examples of questions to ask, or exercises to make
the link between workshop and field experience
High
"Confident and
assumed
transparency"
Participants trust each other to listen, care and be
competent.
They also have confidence in themselves about managing the
consequences of their sharing (no fear of retaliation, ability to
manage misinterpretation, etc.).
Let participants talk about known, recent situations
• "Does this remind you of any situations you have
experienced? Recent ones? Tell us more."
• "How much (frequency, intensity) do these situations affect
you today in your work?"
• "In full transparency, what are the sources you attribute to
these problems?"
Good
“Good transparency
between participants
if confidentiality is
ensured”
Participants trust each other and can share with each other
only if they are guaranteed complete confidentiality.
They are not 100% sure how their words would be treated
otherwise, even if 80% of the cases are ok.
Let participants talk about situations that are far in the past
• "Does this remind you of situations that you experienced a
long time ago or that you know of in contexts other than your
own?"
Low
"Confidence in the
moment, but fear of
some uncontrolled
leak."
The participants are not particularly suspicious of each other.
They do not feel comfortable sharing much about their cases
because they fear misuse of information (e.g., that their
"critique" of certain situations will be misinterpreted and
spread elsewhere). They share only what is easily agreed
upon and without taking any relational risks.
Let participants talk about non-existent and possible situations:
• "Do you think this problem can affect professionals? In what
types of situations for example?"
• "What are the potential abuses if these problems are
overlooked or allowed to continue?"
Bottom
"Law of silence or shy
false propriety
Participants are defensive of each other.
They censor themselves when it comes to talking about
themselves, so as not to risk a direct reaction from others,
reprisals, mockery, reproaches. The group is mostly silent and
most of them wait for others to start.
Let participants talk about a fictional example (e.g., the
examples provided) where no one has to talk about themselves
• Here is an example of a situation with subjects to be put
away. What would you recommend in this case (autonomy
side or consensus side) and why?

2. Collection Phase: Format
You can use different tools for
the collection phase
This collection phase allows the
training participants to make the
link between the training
content and their own situation.
In the form of
a digital survey
(live or by
message)
In an open
discussion
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
In a collective
workshop
dedicated to
these issues

3. Initiation phase
Fictitious example to practice the IVCD Map 1/4
• Here is an example of a task to be
completed by learners (there is no right
answer, the important thing is to learn
to discuss together)
• Exercise: move the tickets into what
you consider best (rather in autonomy,
or in collective consensus, or in case by
case). Discuss why you put these tickets
in each area
• Scenario: You work in a cross-functional
community of practice (optional
membership) in a large company. This
internal community of practice seeks to
capitalize on good practices at the scale
of the large company, by having
different autonomous actors
collaborate around these practices.
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as
a group
Grey area
(case by
case)
Send an
invitation for
an event on
behalf of the
Community
Propose to
onboard a
new
member
Implement
a shared
practice
Submit a
practice
presentation to
the Community
Forum
Organize a
meeting
between
members
Choose a
(document)
format to share
a personal
practice
Exclude a
person from
the
Community

3. Initiation phase
• Here is an example of a task to be completed by
learners (there is no right answer, the important
thing is to learn to discuss together)
• Exercise: move the tickets into what you
consider best (rather in autonomy, or in
collective consensus, or in case by case). Discuss
why you put these tickets in each area
• Scenario: You work in a mobile application
design team (with 1 Designer, 2 developers, 1
product manager) in a large company. As all of
them are working remotely, you are looking to
establish rules of operation for the team that
allows autonomy for members, while avoiding
team fragmentation.
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as
a group
Grey area
(case by
case)
Correct a
spelling
mistake in
the legal
notice
Put in
production a
new version
of the app
Change the
color of a
menu
Review the
technical
architecture
of the
application
Look for ideas
for new
possible
development
s
Rewrite some
files to make
them more
efficient without
changing their
function
Publish a
patch on the
test server

3. Initiation phase
• Here is an example of a task to be
completed by learners (there is no right
answer, the important thing is to learn to
discuss together)
collective consensus, or in case by case).
Discuss why you put these tickets in each
area
• Scenario: You work in a company that
used to have a very hierarchical work
culture. Historically, many people were
just following orders and if not, were
acting as very directive managers. This
culture seems to have reached its limits
(loss of meaning, opportunities, etc.) You
are in an internal logistics management
department. You are a new manager and
you are in charge of changing the culture
to develop more autonomy and reactivity
among the members of this department.
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as
a group
Grey area
(case by
case)
Contact another
member of the
department to
ask for a little
information
Arrange with
a member of
another team
(in the same
department)
Take an
initiative on
his personal
work
Testing a practice
improvement
that can improve
everyone's life
Organize a
team
moment
Change the
rules of
partnership
with other
services
Send an
email about
a daily
problem

3. Initiation phase
Individual" application
• Here is an example of a task to be completed
by learners (there is no right answer, the
important thing is to learn to discuss
together)
collective consensus, or in case by case).
Discuss why you put these tickets in each area
• Scenario: You work in a company that used to
have a very hierarchical work culture.
Historically, many people were just following
orders and if not, were acting as very
directive managers. This culture seems to
have reached its limits (loss of meaning,
opportunities, etc.) You are in an internal
logistics management department. You are a
new manager and you are in charge of
changing the culture to develop more
autonomy and reactivity among the members
of this department.
• You ask yourself what management style you
want to take
Decisions you
prefer to make
alone
Decisions you
prefer to make
with your team
members
Grey area
(case by
case)
Asking to
stop an
obviously
unnecessary
task
Change the
assigned
tasks of a
member of
your team
Decide on
team
objectives
for the year
Changing
work
schedules
Define "the
next skills
to train on".
Set
individual
goals
Change
break times

4. Reality Check Phase
Content and format
• In this phase, the training participants
are no longer asked to apply the IVCD
Map in a training setting, but to use it
in their own real-life situation (daily
work, etc.). That is to say, during
their worktime.
• The idea is to confront this training
tool with reality, in order to share
afterwards on the applicability and
the implementation tips.
• The organization of this phase is
ideally done several weeks after the
previous phase. The time to find the
application opportunity.
• The format for the debriefing is simply
a group debriefing session with the
same participants as in the training,
ideally with enough participants who
have applied.
There are several application
opportunities, of which here are several
examples, from the simplest (little risk-
taking) to the most engaging
1. Simple: Apply the IVCD map to
yourself (describe your own job in
the form of an IVCD map)
2. Slightly engaging: Organize an IVCD
map (with presentation) with the
most motivated members of your
team
3. Engaging: Organize a retrospective
based on the IVCD Map, to discuss
desired autonomies or consensus
together
4. Highly engaging: Use the IVCD map
with your team and another team,
to improve cooperation and
interactions between teams
Application debriefing questions:
Here are some questions to ask and
share among participants, once the
IVCD map is applied:
1. How easy did you find the
exercise? What makes the IVCD
Map difficult?
2. How did you "set the stage“ for
IVCD map workshop? What did
you choose and why?
3. If you were to do the exercise
again, would you feel more
confident? What would you
change?
4. What would you say to others to
motivate them to test the IVCD
map in their turn?

5. Confirmation of successes phase
In this phase, the goal is to capitalize and confirm what works in each
person's context. Here are some questions to ask as a group:
1. What was MOST useful to us in the IVCD Map exercise? How
would we sum it up?
2. Where can you save this essential information so that it can
be used again later?
3. How will we manage this knowledge (dissemination,
transmission, etc.)?

Limitations and extensions for
the IVCD Map

Limitations of the IVCD Map
The IVCD Map is a simple tool that does not address the following aspects:
• List of topics for discussion
• Recommendations on "what to put in autonomy or consensus
• Details on the form of collective decision
The IVCD map does not seek to push a particular culture (fostering autonomy or
consensus), it is simply a tool of expression for a group to improve its daily life.

The IVCD Map and the combination with
other tools
The IVCD Map was designed to be an extremely simple and light tool. It is of course
not the only methodological tool that exists on the subject of « autonomy vs
consensus » and it can be complemented with other more specialized tools.
• With Delegation Poker (Management 3.0): After a round with the IVCD Map to
clarify everyone's freedoms in a simple way, we can go into more detail with
delegation poker, especially on the decisions of the team leader or manager.
• With RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed): After a round of IVCD
map as a discussion tool to introduce the topic in a simple way. All collective
decisions can be detailed within the RACI framework.

IVCD Detailed map
Each time a ticket is in the "consensus" box:
The detailed IVCD Map consists in detailing "who are the collectives"
associated (Green Tickets in the example below)
Decisions that
are best made
alone
Decisions that
are best and
agreed upon as a
group
Grey area
(case by
case)
IVCD Simple Map IVCD Detailed map

IVCD Map detailed
Map and ticket format
Great consensus
Autonomous decision
Each agent
decides
Decision by
all
A committee
(including the
agent) decides
A committee
(without the
agent) decides
Choosing work tools
Tools and process
managers of the team
Decide on holiday
entertainment
Party Committee
For each ticket, once
the decision is made,
we also add WHO
makes the decision for
collective decisions

Clarify Individual vs Consensus Decisions

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Clarify Individual vs Consensus Decisions

Similar to Clarify Individual vs Consensus Decisions (18)

More from Alexandre Quach

More from Alexandre Quach (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Clarify Individual vs Consensus Decisions