Farming for Dissent
A Critical Framework for Decision Making in Uncertain Times
In a world defined by exponential change and increasing complexity (we truly live in a VUCA world now – just look at the news on any given day), our traditional decision-making frameworks are showing their limitations. Through our work with organizations globally (including our time as executives at Mozilla, at the time one of the largest open-source communities globally), we’ve observed a critical pattern: the most robust decisions emerge from deliberately cultivated opposition.
The concept of “farming for dissent” – actively seeking and nurturing opposing viewpoints and made popular by Netflix – aligns perfectly with our MAP (Multiple Alternative Perspectives) framework (which we brought with us from Mozilla and have refined since then). When integrated, these approaches create a powerful system for navigating uncertainty.
The process is straightforward yet yields incredibly robust results:
Begin with your initial thesis (60% confidence level)
Systematically seek opposing viewpoints through structured 1:1 conversations
Scale to group discussions while maintaining cognitive diversity
Document and synthesize insights until reaching 90%+ confidence
What makes this approach particularly effective is its recognition of our cognitive limitations. By actively farming for dissent, we’re not just collecting data, but systematically dismantling our blind spots.
The key lies in the systematic application:
Document core assumptions before seeking input
Create structured opposition teams with clear mandates
Implement the MAP methodology to scale insights
Build feedback mechanisms that reward early opposition
It’s important to note, that this isn’t about achieving consensus (which regularly leads to mediocrity). It’s about making better decisions through structured opposition.
As uncertainty becomes our constant companion, the ability to systematically farm for dissent becomes a core organizational capability. The organizations that will thrive in our world are those that can institutionalize this practice while maintaining decisive action (to quote Jeff Bezos: “Doing things at high speed, that’s the best defense against the future.”)
Curious? Here is our guide to MAP decision-making.
@Pascal
A good corollary is designing for disobedience.
In other words, build things that provide your users some degree of freedom to break little 'r' rules. So they can provide you with the contrarian weak signals of usage patterns and feedback.
Think of it as a lightweight outsourcing of your innovation to emergent user design patterns, illuminating new novel paths for needs and applications you can better serve with your product or service. Perhaps a more polite form of farming for dissent.