While researching, I found this inspiring post by Gokul Rajaram who is someone I respect tremendously. If you haven't heard of Gokul, he's considered the Godfather of Google AdSense, creator of FB's ad platform and now a leader at Square. It's worth at least considering his advice :-)
After a decision is made, each participant must commit support out loud. Pledging support aloud binds you to the greater good.
So, you want me to count coup in front of the defeated and make them state their surrender for all to hear? I would rather just move on to implementing the decision and rely on their professionalism to not break anything. Their are some folks in the US that do not react well to such public displays of acquiesce.
I agree with the others, it still sounds like a cult because you're forcing agreement. You're creating a false consensus by removing the right to respectfully disagree and taken away the "I told you so" satisfaction and the ability to build reputation from such things. It creates a culture where no one bothers to disagree, it's too much work for no reward.
Search for "Dave Mitchell soapbox consensus" for a much funnier and well thought out look at it.
This seems infantilizing and cult like.
Forced speech in general is a red flag in a company culture or a relationship.
If people don’t respect that a decision has been made, that is a problem, but this ritual is not going to solve that.