Consensus-based decision-making is increasingly referenced in efforts to democratize governance in higher education, yet little is known about how consensus processes are enacted, under what conditions they work, and what lessons can be drawn for higher education contexts. Using a realist method—identifying context–mechanism–outcome (CMO) configurations—we examined how, when, and for whom consensus-based processes foster mutual understanding and inclusive governance. Findings from sixty-three records point to four contexts where consensus processes unfold: conflict resolution, inter-organizational collaboration, intra-organizational decision-making, and Indigenous governance. Across these, consensus emerges not as an outcome but as a relational process requiring attention to facilitation, process design, representation, and power dynamics. In higher education, consensus has been used in strategic planning, policy development, and localized decision-making. Indigenous-led approaches emphasized the revitalization of traditional knowledge and principles. We conceptualize consensus processes as dynamic social systems comprising interrelated parts—people, principles, processes, institutional structures, and information flows—that generate emergent outcomes, adapt, and occasionally disrupt the larger systems in which they are embedded. Deliberating lessons learned, our synthesis contributes to ongoing discussions on democratizing higher education and informs policy conversations on embedding deliberative governance practices.
Charles-Rodriguez et al. (Tue,) studied this question.