Consensus-Building for Communities and Large Groups

The goal of consensus-building is to achieve the agreement of everyone in a group regarding complex conflicts, shared decisions, and joint plans. The process is conducted by a qualified, specially trained mediator.

What is consensus-building?

Consensus-building is a process to achieve agreement among a large group of participants regarding conflicts, collective decisions, or joint future plans. The process is conducted by a qualified mediator who specializes in consensus-building.

Similar to mediation, consensus-building is a voluntary process conducted by experienced and neutral mediators. All involved parties may participate. The mediators begin the process by mapping the needs, interests, strengths, and resources connected to the parties and issues at hand. During the process, various creative solutions are raised with the aim of reaching an agreement that optimally addresses the needs of all the involved parties. The central point in consensus-building is to create a consensus, not simply a majority. This requires detailed preparation; often meeting with the parties separately before bringing them all together.

What are the advantages of consensus-building?

  1. A process that increases cooperation and emphasizes continued cordial relations among the parties.
  2. A focused and structured process to produce broad agreements on specific issues or subjects that lead to clearly defined outcomes (i.e. agreement, plan, joint vision, etc.).
  3. An effective process for managing issues that involve a large group of people.

Who can use this service?

Consensus-building processes are designed for families, non-profit organizations, communities with diverse constituencies, leaders of communities in conflict, tenants, urban renewal managers, municipal and rural government authorities, business, and other large groups.

Who conducts the service?

Consensus-building sessions are conducted by qualified and experienced mediators who have graduated from specialized training in consensus-building.

How much does it cost?

The cost of services is determined by the number and length of meetings.


A community worker in one of Jerusalem’s neighborhoods referred Tanya, head of the Tenants’ Association of an apartment building, to the Mosaica’s Mediation Center. There was a dispute between the neighbors in the building. During conversations by Mosaica with all the neighbors, Mosaica received the following picture:

The ground floor of the building includes two rented apartments. Sara, a divorcee with two teenage daughters, lived in one apartment. She lacked hanging space for drying laundry and so she positioned two laundry ­­racks in the communal lobby area and hung clothes, including underwear. In addition, Sara’s daughters observed the Sabbath and therefore they placed toothpicks in the stairwell light fixtures so that that the lights remained on over the Sabbath. Lastly, Sara was very unhappy with the service provided by building maintenance and so refused to pay her part of the fees for the building’s upkeep.

The other apartment on the ground floor was home to Gidi, a divorcee with two grown sons. Gidi basically annexed the building lobby; putting in sofas, table, and chairs for his personal use. The boys and Gidi’s friends used the lobby as their recreation room, smoking and drinking late into the night. Neighbors from the other apartments threw the sofas in the trash, but Gidi simply replaced them with other ones. The neighbors notified the authorities and Gidi was fined, but nothing changed. Gidi ignored the presence of the other tenants, even going so far as to take up all the space in the communal building storage room. The tenants felt that he cared only for his own interests. He claimed that this is how he was raised in keeping with the “Jerusalem tenement building” mentality and anyone with a problem with him should just leave.

Gant and Damos, an Ethiopian couple with grown children, lived on a floor above Gidi. The woman spoke relatively fluent Hebrew and was previously the building cleaner until the tenants’ association said they had no money to pay her. Recently, a new cleaner was brought to the building. Gant was not happy with her cleaning abilities and refused to pay her part for the service. There was also a lot of friction in the lobby between Gant, Damos’s boys, and Gidi’s children. The sofas in the lobby were the primary reason for problems. They attracted cats and strangers that came to sleep there. Gant and Damos threw out the sofas, but they did not take them far enough. Gidi brought them back and his conduct worsened.

Another first-floor tenant was an Arab lady called Rafa. She was very disturbed by the occurrences in the lobby, as well as the fact that the lights were left on for the entire Sabbath. She paid her tenant association fees fully and promptly, but was very concerned that others were not doing likewise. She was afraid of Sara and Gidi, and did not intend to speak to them directly.

Natalie, a recent immigrant from France, lived on the second floor. She was also alarmed by the recreation area established in the lobby. The place was filthy, covered in cigarette butts and smelling of cat urine. Arriving at the building late at night, she felt uncomfortable crossing a lobby area filled with people smoking and drinking alcohol. She felt threatened. Sara’s laundry racks were always in the way. Natalie dreamt about a lobby like the ones in Paris, a place that one would be proud to bring guests. She would prefer that the tenants work together to clean and tidy the area and designate a place for a bike rack. She had a bike and did not use it because of lack of storage space.

Tania lived on the floor above Natalie, a woman from the Soviet Union and a member of the tenants’ association. She struggled getting some of the tenants to pay their fees; she did not know how to approach them for payment and was not assertive enough to contact them directly. In the past, Sara would help her collect the fees, but she quickly lost interest and quit. The atmosphere in the building deteriorated badly. Everyone had complaints, particularly about the lobby, and Tania was at a loss.

The tenants participated in the consensus-building process facilitated by two Mosaica mediators. During that time, they listened to each other’s needs, learned to understand each other, and planned how the lobby would look, and what hours it would serve each of their needs. It was decided that, as an act of goodwill, Sara would buy the building a Sabbath timer for the lights and Gidi would install it. Gant was elected to clean the building in return for a deduction on her rent.