How to resolve disagreement among panel members during deliberation
Disagreement is healthy. Undocumented disagreement is a defect.
Panel disagreement at deliberation is normal. It usually signals that the panel is weighing evidence seriously. The risk is not the disagreement, it is how it gets resolved.
Three rules. First, return to the evidence. If panel members disagree on a candidate, go back to what was actually said, what was demonstrated in the written task, what the referees reported. Disagreement grounded in evidence is productive; disagreement grounded in impression is not. Second, separate the qualities. Panels often disagree overall because they are weighing different qualities differently, surface that, and the disagreement usually narrows. Third, document the resolution. A selection report that shows the panel’s reasoning, including where views diverged and how they were reconciled, is more defensible than one that projects false unanimity.
The chair’s role is to hold the panel on evidence, not to force consensus.