Blockchain consortia uphold value-addition through collaboration between organizations, by exploring, prototyping and innovating together. Blockchain technology presented itself as a new solution to the sharing of data proofs since 2008, with certain components such as smart contracts and privacy-enhancing components currently at different maturity levels. Blockchain consortia do not only navigate these technical factors, but also non-technical factors of decision-criteria are employed, and if development of a blockchain-based application fails, alternative data sharing technologies are explored. With the main research question ‘which guidelines can aid consortium managers in their decision-making process of developing blockchain-based applications?’, this study had the goal of contributing guidelines of decision-making processes, for aiding in the development of blockchain-applications in a rigorous manner. In order to tackle this problem, this research project performed case studies. This study makes use of a combined analytical framework, by merging the Resource-based View and Consortium Capabilities frameworks, the latter being a blockchain-specific framework. A multiple-case study approach is followed, by which four most-different cases of Dutch blockchain consortia are analysed. This is done by firstly scoping the consortium with desk research, followed by interviewing consortium managers, with interview questions based on the combined analytical framework. Thereafter, a hybrid coding approach, and thematic analysis are applied to investigate the challenges, potential benefits and risks in the decision-making process. The inductive part of the hybrid coding approach is the exploration of groups and factors of the deductively identified challenges, potential benefits and risks, which led to the creation of the Blockchain Consortia Guidelines, that presents guidelines on the inductively identified factors: Knowledge Transfer, Technology and use-case, Security, Funding and Economic Considerations, Organization and Vision. The guidelines were validated by interviewing managers of two additional blockchain cases, yielding a high level of recognition of the guidelines provided. Adaptation of certain guidelines was necessary, and implemented with the critique provided from partial recognition and non-recognition of guideline elements. This increased the external validity of the observed factors and decision-making guidelines. The scientific contribution of this research lies in providing top-level factors, the corresponding groups on the middle level, and guidelines on the bottom-level. The resulting factors and groups when compared to the existing literature (Consortium Capabilities framework), show that Knowledge Transfer, Funding and Economic Considerations, and Organizational, are additional aspects on the factor level that are given insufficient attention in the Consortium Capabilities framework. A limitation is that the interview data did not allow for yielding a (blockchain consortia-oriented) process-based framework as a final deliverable due to insufficient relationships between decision-making and factors in the combined analytical framework. Nonetheless, the rich qualitative data allowed for practical guidelines to be developed. Another limitation is a skew in the data towards potential benefits mentioned by managers, which is an indication that a self-serving bias, social-desirability bias, or a combination of these is present. Addressing these limitations is proposed when undertaking future research.