There are many examples from other industry sectors of teams who have delivered highly successful projects or programmes despite a measure of disagreement among team members. Collaborative benefits come from team members openly airing their views and suggestions, thereby encouraging commitment to adhere to the most persuasive line of debate, even if some individual team members' views differ from the majority.
The military adage of 'better to make a decision than no decision' should encourage team members to unite behind decisions, even if there is some uncertainty about the outcomes. Collective support for a decision also promotes a greater degree of confidence among those outside the project or programme team, showing how the team is willing to sacrifice some entrenched positions in favour of a collaborative commitment to resolve a problem and avoid a conflict.
That said, it is also important to ensure that disagreements are subject to a process of persuasion that ultimately leads to consensus. For example, the Core Group considered in Section 7.3 requires unanimous decisions made by those members in attendance in order to avoid a majority vote undermining the collaborative commitments of the minority.
Problems will arise if the search for consensus is not a proactive process of persuasion or if the need for consensus allows people to default to the lowest common denominator. Also, many project innovations and specialist contributions depend on delegated authority and professional judgment rather than seeking agreement at every stage. Consensus-building needs to be supported by leadership and active teamwork.