Balancing Transparency and Timeliness in Organizational Decision-Making

Welcome back to Ask a Nonprofit Expert, NPQ’s advice column for nonprofit readers, by civic leaders who have built thriving, equitable organizations.

This series offers Leading Edge members a new benefit: the opportunity to submit tough challenges anonymously and get personalized advice. In this column, we’ll publish answers to common questions to strengthen our entire community’s capacity.

In today’s issue, Niloufar Khonsari answers a reader’s question about balancing transparency and timeliness in organizational decision-making.

Stuck on a problem? Submit your question here.

Dear Ask a Nonprofit Expert,

Our leadership team is invested in greater inclusion and transparency when it comes to important organizational decisions. But so many of us have had nightmare experiences with attempts at consensus that take too much time and sometimes do not even conclude with a clear decision.

What decision-making methods can we consider?

Sincerely,

Transparency-Committed Reader

Dear Transparency-Committed Reader,

You’re not alone. So many of us want decision-making to reflect our collective values (like transparency, care, and shared power), but it’s hard to actually put those values into practice. That gap between what we believe and how we decide can be frustrating. And getting stuck in the process is a common concern I hear from groups.

I am happy to share, though, that decision-making doesn’t have to be a nightmare. There are tested and thoughtful ways to structure group decisions that are participatory, time-bound, and lead to real action.

Before diving into specific decision-making methods, here’s a grounding principle: Decision-making is a shared practice. It’s something we learn and get better at together. When group decisions feel frustrating, it’s often because there wasn’t a shared understanding of how the process works, or there was a mismatch between intentions and structure. But decision-making can actually be a predictable, easeful part of your work, where people grow closer together, appreciate differences, and things move forward effectively.

Let’s also name the time concern directly. Participatory processes can take more time up front. But we rarely count the time lost through unclear or top-down decisions: the revisiting, backtracking, reopened conversations, staff disengagement, or people quietly opting out. Clear, participatory processes often save time and energy in the long run and build trust, alignment, and better outcomes.

A great starting point is choosing a default method for major decisions, so you’re not reinventing the wheel every time. This one shift can prevent a lot of confusion and miscommunication. And then: Practice it, reflect, and adapt it to your culture until it becomes like muscle memory.

Here are two approaches I’ve seen work well for teams who want to be participatory and keep things moving:

• Modified Consensus
  This method doesn’t require full agreement. Some dissent is expected. What matters is that everyone gets to weigh in, their feedback is integrated, and a clear threshold is set (like 75 percent or a supermajority) for moving forward. It’s often paired with a scaled voting tool, like the fist-to-five method. People can say, “I don’t fully agree, but I can live with it.” This builds in participation but protects momentum.

• Advice Process
  In this method, the person closest to the issue leads the decision. They’re expected to seek input from those with relevant expertise and those impacted. But they hold responsibility for making the final call—and for sharing it transparently. What makes this work is the clarity: Everyone knows their role, the process is visible, and input is honored. It balances autonomy with collective wisdom.

Both approaches help teams avoid common pitfalls: endless loops, unclear authority, or hidden power dynamics. And over time, they help teams grow stronger and more connected.

For deeper guidance, I encourage you to check out Chapter 5 of The Future Is Collective and the resources below:

Resources

1. The Future Is Collective (Chapter 5: A Structure for Our Culture)
2. Participatory Decision-Making: When and How to Apply Inclusive Decision-Making Methods (NPQ Leading Edge webinar)
3. The Advice Process (Scroll down to ‘In Practice’)
4. Modified Consensus Decision Making 101
5. “Building a Collective Future: A Conversation with Niloufar Khonsari”

At the heart of your question is something we all carry: a deep desire to be part of something that feels principled, connected, and clear. How we make decisions is one of the most meaningful reflections of our values in action. Here’s to living into our dreams (and leaving behind the nightmares)!

Warmly,
Niloufar Khonsari