Leading a geo-political region from conflict to sustainable post-conflict requires a specific mix of leadership roles and practices. Consensus and non-consensus among a large sample of regional leaders may require innovative views of consensus to develop a context-specific model for post-conflict leadership.
Determination of consensus and non-consensus may be different when using large sample sizes compared to small sample sizes. In a large sample, participants differing from the consensus view may be significant in number, warranting examination of sources on non-consensus, even on items of overall consensus. The consequences of misinterpretation of consensus and non-consensus may include poor sustainability of the changes implied by moving from conflict to post-conflict. In the current research, new approaches and definitions of consensus emerged that may have application in other contexts.
Author(s): John Bryan, eProcesses Consulting, Inc.Learn more at:Determination of Consensus for Sustainable Post-Conflict Leadership