In Defense of the Slow Committee
Deliberation is treated as an obstacle to be routed around. Most of what it produces cannot be produced any other way.
Nobody defends committees. They are the standing joke of organizational life, the place proposals go to be diluted, and the standard explanation for why an institution cannot do anything quickly.
The critique is fair about half the time. What it misses is what a functioning committee actually produces, which is not a decision so much as a decision that will survive.
Three things deliberation does
The first is error finding. A proposal examined by people with different backgrounds and incentives gets objections that its author could not have generated alone, because the author does not know what they do not know.
The second is buy in. A policy that people had a chance to shape is one they will implement rather than quietly resist. Implementation failure is the most common way a good decision produces a bad outcome, and it is almost always a consequence of the decision arriving without consultation.
The third is legitimacy. A choice made in a room with a record can be defended in public. A choice made by one person under time pressure has no defense except the authority of the person who made it, which is exactly the defense that fails when the choice turns out badly.
Speed is a real value and it is not free. The bill arrives during implementation.
When speed genuinely wins
There are decisions where delay is the greater risk, and pretending otherwise is how deliberative bodies discredit themselves. Emergencies, reversible experiments, and choices where information will not improve with time all belong to the fast track.
The discipline is knowing which is which, and building institutions that can run both modes rather than pretending that one is always right. Most organizations have exactly one speed and apply it to everything.
The unfashionable conclusion
A committee that meets, reads the material, argues on the substance, and produces a written record is a technology for making better decisions than any individual in the room would make alone.
It is also slow, tedious, and impossible to make exciting. Those are the operating costs of the thing, not defects in it, and an institution that eliminates them has eliminated the function too.
Claire Vantassel writes for The 13th Bell on ideas. This piece was edited and fact checked before publication.
Get The 13th Bell in your inbox
