Skip to content
Cadence OneFive° Handbook

How We Make Decisions

Section titled “The Core Pattern: Consent Process”

At Cadence OneFive, we use one decision-making pattern for almost everything: the consent process.

We use it for:

  • Your quarterly workplan
  • Hiring decisions
  • Feature prioritization
  • Budget requests
  • Process changes
  • Pretty much anything that affects others’ work

The goal: find what’s worth trying AND safe to try.

Two Questions Every Decision Must Answer

Section titled “Two Questions Every Decision Must Answer”

1. Is it worth trying?

Section titled “1. Is it worth trying?”
  • Does this advance our climate mission?
  • Is the potential value worth the time/money/energy?
  • Is this the right priority given our constraints?
  • What will we learn even if it fails?

2. Is it safe to try?

Section titled “2. Is it safe to try?”
  • Can we recover if this doesn’t work?
  • What’s the worst realistic outcome?
  • Do we have escape hatches?
  • Can we detect problems early and pivot?

If both answers are yes, we shape the proposal until everyone consents to trying it.

Section titled “How the Consent Process Works”

Step 1: Draft Your Proposal

Section titled “Step 1: Draft Your Proposal”

Write down what you want to try and why. Share with people it affects.

Use the consent proposal template.

Step 2: Gather Input & Surface Concerns

Section titled “Step 2: Gather Input & Surface Concerns”

Consent Stakeholders (people whose work this significantly affects):

  • Can raise concerns: “This would break my work because…” or “This isn’t worth our resources because…”
  • Work with you to reshape the proposal
  • Must consent before you proceed

Advice Stakeholders (people with relevant expertise):

  • Offer suggestions and insights
  • Don’t have veto power
  • You incorporate their input as makes sense

Not valid concerns:

  • “I would do it differently” (preference, not objection)
  • “I’m not sure this will work” (uncertainty is expected)
  • “There might be a better way” (suggestion, not blocker)

Step 3: Shape It Into “Worth Trying AND Safe to Try”

Section titled “Step 3: Shape It Into “Worth Trying AND Safe to Try””

Work with stakeholders to adjust:

  • Reduce scope to fit resources
  • Add guardrails to manage risk
  • Change timeline to align with priorities
  • Add checkpoints to evaluate and pivot
  • Clarify the learning goal

Outcome: A version everyone consents to trying.

This Is NOT Consensus

Section titled “This Is NOT Consensus”

We don’t need everyone to agree or like your idea.

We DO need to address serious concerns about harm or waste.

“Safe to try” means we achieve consensus by changing the scope, complexity, duration, or mitigants of the experiment so that everyone agrees there’s no reason not to do it.

This is different from “disagree and commit” where someone decides debate is over and pushes forward despite objections. We actually resolve the objections.

Section titled “When You DON’T Need Consent”

Personal decisions - If it only affects you, just do it:

  • Your work schedule
  • Your tools (if compatible with team)
  • Taking PTO
  • Declining meetings

Rule of thumb: Does this affect others’ work? If no → your call. If yes → consent process.

Keep It Fast & Simple

Section titled “Keep It Fast & Simple”

The consent process might be:

  • One meeting
  • Async comments on a doc
  • Quick chat thread
  • Multiple discussions

As long as everyone understands the proposal and can give meaningful input, we’re good. No need for more process than necessary.

See Consent Process How-To for detailed facilitation guide.