Think of a time when you attended a meeting where tempers flared. That might be easy — it might have happened yesterday morning. For most of us, fortunately, it's a rare occurrence.
Despite their rarity, stressed-out, anger-infused meetings can be damaging. We must question whatever a team produces when it's angry or fearful or under stress. When we can feel the tension in a meeting, we can't do our best work, because we're focused on whatever is the source of tension, instead of the task. And the source of the tension is usually a duel between two people.
Solid planning can help reduce the chances that a meeting will erupt into a duel. But what can we do when a duel does erupt?
Some teams take "time out." Someone suggests a break and — usually without acknowledging the obvious conflict — the meeting breaks for a few minutes. While this approach does often defuse the immediate situation, the root causes remain in place. Although a relapse is likely, the break is a useful tool for groups that cannot confront the issue more directly.
Groups that deal openly with the problem have more choices.Despite their rarity,
meetings can be
- Enlist a facilitator
- Let the facilitator track the queue of speakers. Find someone not otherwise involved in the meeting. If you must choose a participant, make clear that the facilitator cannot participate in meeting content.
- Pledge not to interrupt
- Everyone agrees to speak only when acknowledged by the facilitator. When we interrupt, we can convey the message that we don't value the ideas of the person interrupted, or perhaps that we don't value the person we interrupted. When a meeting boils over, such a message can be very damaging.
- Suppress sidebars
- Sidebar conversations are distractions in any meeting. But when the meeting is near the boiling point, and we have no idea what two people are whispering to each other, we tend to make up something really horrible.
- Declare a three-exchange dialog
- As the queue of speakers accumulates, the logical order of what they have to say might not match their order in the queue. When two people need to dialog, the facilitator can ask for the group's permission for a dialog with a limit of three exchanges. In a meeting near the boiling point, a three-exchange dialog can give the dueling dyad a way to have a structured, interruption-free, respectful conversation.
- Take a brief silent break
- If you must take a break, make it brief, and agree not to speak with each other. When tempers are high, some tend to interpret conversations that occur in breaks as conspiratorial. A silent break gives everyone a chance to breathe and to calm down without fear that anyone is hatching a plot.
As a last resort, consider inviting an observer. If you choose someone not otherwise associated with the group, you'll be rewarded with a fresh perspective, and a possible key to turning down the heat. Top Next Issue
Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenfPisQwhtshXzxJVvner@ChacUYLEiQVcXCoqJzufoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- Encourage Truth Telling
- Getting to the truth can be a difficult task for managers. People sometimes withhold, spin, or slant
reports, especially when the implications are uncomfortable or threatening. A culture that supports
truth telling can be an organization's most valuable asset.
- Assumptions and the Johari Window: I
- The roots of both creative and destructive conflict can often be traced to differing assumptions of
the parties to the conflict. Working out these differences is a lot easier when we know what everyone's
- Remote Facilitation in Synchronous Contexts: II
- Facilitators of synchronous distributed meetings — meetings that occur in real time, via telephone
or video — encounter problems that facilitators of face-to-face meetings do not. Here's Part II
of a little catalog of those problems, and some suggestions for addressing them.
- The Power and Hazards of Anecdotes: II
- Anecdotes are powerful tools of persuasion, but with that power comes a risk that we might become persuaded
of false positions. Here is Part II of a set of examples illustrating some hazards of anecdotes.
- Listening to Ramblers
- Ramblers are people who can't get to the point. They ramble, they get lost in detail, and listeners
can't follow their logic, if there is any. How can you deal with ramblers while maintaining civility
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming July 8: Multi-Expert Consensus
- Some working groups consist of experts from many fields. When they must reach a decision by consensus, members have several options. Defining those options in advance can help the group reach a decision with all its relationships intact. Available here and by RSS on July 8.
- And on July 15: Disjoint Concept Vocabularies
- In disputes or in problem solving sessions, when we can't seem to come to agreement, we often attribute the difficulty to miscommunication, histories of disagreements, hidden agendas, or "personality clashes." Sometimes the cause is much simpler. Sometimes the concept vocabularies of the parties don't overlap. Available here and by RSS on July 15.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenfPisQwhtshXzxJVvner@ChacUYLEiQVcXCoqJzufoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
- Bullet Points: Mastery or Madness?
Decision-makers in modern organizations commonly demand briefings in the form of bullet points or a series of series of bullet points. But this form of presentation has limited value for complex decisions. We need something more. We actually need to think. Briefers who combine the bullet-point format with a variety of persuasion techniques can mislead decision-makers, guiding them into making poor decisions. Read more about this program.