tl;dr Improve decision making by formalizing dissent.
The Fremont City Council has a publicity problem.
The community is divided. The atmosphere is toxic. And still, nothing changes.
Yesterday, in the latest chapter of the Costco and Lincoln Premium Poultry project, the Fremont City Council unanimously approved 5 separate agenda items related to the Costco project. Reading about it in the Fremont Tribune made a feel a bit ill.
The opposition to Costco is being listened to, but not being heard.
Not once have we heard any murmur of discontent from anyone in a leadership position. A project this huge has MASSIVE risks and rewards. I can’t recall a time when any of the risks have been acknowledged by a decision maker. Everyone’s mind is already made up- I imagine the allure of confidence created by unilateral consensus is too much to resist.
There is something to be said for presenting a ‘united front’. But there is also something to be said about acknowledging the realities of the situation.
This is why I propose the Fremont City Council adopt the 10th Man Rule.
What the hell is the 10th Man Rule?
Well, because I’m a fun guy, let’s watch a short movie clip to explain it.
Transcript of the 10th Man Rule:
“If nine of us look at the same information and arrive at the exact same conclusion, it’s the duty of the tenth man to disagree. No matter how improbable is may seem, the 10th Man has to start thinking on the assumption that the other nine are wrong.”
Despite the visual aid including Brad Pitt and being from a zombie apocalypse film, the concept of the 10th Man has merit.
In an article written titled “Improving Executive Decisions by Formalizing Dissent: The Corporate Devil’s Advocate”, the authors explain states:
“The efforts of … consumer’s advocate groups also present negative information to the consuming public, balancing what they consider to be one-sided advertising claims. The dissenting ole thereby provides more complete information to decision-makers who have neither the time nor the expertise to gather and analyze data pro and con for household consumption decisions.”
“If volunteering criticism of an others work can be taken as a personal attack, constructive criticism may be withheld.“
“Institutionalizing the dissent function may help de-personalize the conflict generated by criticism”
No plan is perfect and we’re all human. By normalizing and endorsing a “Devil’s Advocate”, you ensure your plan is as air-tight as you think it is and you also minimize the risk of being blindsided by something (like an additional 1.8 million dollar LB840 loan) that you could have overlooked.
When the public sees the word “unanimous” over and over on a topic that has seen such opposition and controversy, it breeds distrust. I think that the Fremont City Council, and the public which they represent, can greatly benefit from normalizing disagreement in their future endeavors. It would help combat the ‘consensus thinking’ that tends to happen with groups like this and demonstrate that they are half-way serious about addressing the communities criticisms.