Niemeyer, S., and Dryzek, J. S. (2007). “The ends of deliberation: Meta-consensus and inter-subjective rationality as ideal outcomes.” Swiss Political Science Review, 13(4), 497-526.
Argues that full agreement on outcomes is an unrealistic and often undesirable goal for deliberation. The authors propose two alternative ideal outcomes. Meta-consensus is agreement about the nature of the issue: which values, beliefs and preferences are legitimate and how the choice is structured. Inter-subjective rationality is consistency between the reasons people accept and the preferences they hold. They show how Q-methodology can measure both.
The theoretical case for starting a TIME profile as an unscored Q-sort. A governance body in the E form may never reach consensus on outcomes, and it can still reach agreement on how an issue is framed and whose lenses are legitimate. That is a measurable goal, and Q-methodology measures it without scoring individuals.