Skip to content

Knowledge-Based Decision Making (KBDM) & Work Groups

“The Directors’ presentation, ‘Creating a Culture of Trust,’ was a fantastic introduction to the principles of Knowledge-Based Decision-Making (KBDM) to Reach an Informed Group Conscience. This reminded me of when I was Delegate, and there was a grapefruit on the podium, to remind us that the grapefruit was to be a repository for bitterness, a precursor to ‘presume goodwill.’ We all struggled with the KBDM process, but it has made the Conference and other WSO-level work better!” Liz W.S., Opening Dinner Speaker, 2012 WSC p81

podium with a grapefruit

Five Key Elements

Five key elements comprise the Knowledge-Based Decision-Making process to reach an informed group conscience: 

  1. Open communication between leadership and membership.
  2. Dialogue before deliberation.
  3. All decision-makers have common access to full information.
  4. Existence in a culture of trust.
  5. Confidence in the competency of our partners.

KBDM Tools

Discussion Preparation

In a Knowledge-Based Decision-Making (KBDM) culture, full discussion of an idea takes place with background information introduced to frame the topic before a motion is presented. Sometimes these discussions continue over several Conferences before any decision for a motion or action is made.

KBDM requires considerable research and information gathering before and possibly even during the discussion. At the end of a discussion, further information and knowledge may be necessary to reach an informed group conscience. A motion need not be made after every discussion. Premature action (e.g., making or amending motions early in the discussion or hastily calling the question) can divert attention from the subject at hand, thus confusing or delaying Conference business. With KBDM, the decision reached is usually one that most Conference members can support.

Five KBDM Questions

The background information used to frame a topic is usually the result of answering the 5 KBDM questions below:

Question 1:  What do we know about our members’ or prospective members’ wants, needs, or preferences that are relevant to this discussion?

Question 2:  What do we know about the capacity and strategic position of the organization relative to this issue?

Question 3:  What do we know about the current realities and evolving dynamics that are relevant to this discussion?

Question 4:  What are the ethical implications of our choices (pros and cons)? This includes consideration of how the Legacies apply. Identify both Pros and Cons.

Question 5:  What do we wish we knew, but don’t?

Timeline Highlights

  • 2008 World Service Conference Summary (p9): “The Chairperson of the Board then asked Conference members to take a look at the Knowledge-Based Decision-Making (KBDM) process for an informed group conscience that was introduced two years ago.”
  • 2012 WSC Summary Thought Forces and Task Forces (p3): “A Thought Force is a temporary unit of people established to brainstorm ideas and to develop strategies on a single defined task or activity. . . . they can be flagged in the Knowledge-Based Decision-Making (KBDM) questions under ‘Things we don’t know but wish we did.’”
  • 2015 Spring AFG Area Highlights Spring 2015 (p3): “There were many suggestions about the meetings. Knowledge-Based Decision-Making (KBDM) process to reach an informed group conscience was discussed in the November Bulletin, which answered a few questions as to why we don’t use Robert’s Rules and why KBDM is more inclusive than the old way of conducting business.”
  • 2017 August WSO Policy Committee Update Letter: An example of how the WSC Open Policy Committee used a Thought Force to create a KBDM that led to a creation of a Work Group: “Electronic Meetings discussion, started at the 2017 WSC Open Policy meeting, resulted in a thought force created to produce a KBDM for the July 2017 Policy Meeting. The Policy Committee reviewed the KBDM and after a discussion decided to create a work group that will explore ways to reach out to electronic meetings and find ways to allow them to fully participate in the fellowship.”

Again, none of these groups is a decision-making body, but they may make recommendations. Each
body’s objective is to complete its activity and present it to the originating body to move forward. 2012 WSC Summary Thought Forces and Task Forces (p3)