Mark clicked to the next slide and paused, waiting for the explosion. Everyone at the table seemed to be reading and re-reading his conclusion, but none of them were exploding. So he began.

Photo (cc) by SA 2.0 abardwell
"The Review Team's conclusion is simple. We don't believe that Marigold can make any date before July…even August is doubtful. To get to 95% confidence, we think we have to go out to November."
There. He'd said it.
Lambert, both elbows on the conference table, leaned forward. He seemed to make eye contact with everyone around the table at once. "Well," he began, "before we sort this out, I need one thing. What we've just heard is not to be repeated to the rest of the team. Or anyone. Clear?"
By choosing secrecy, Lambert might be guiding the group into a see-no-evil mode, which could jeopardize the project. It's a risky course.
When a team shares all team-relevant information, it's functioning as an open system. A team that intentionally confines some information within small subgroups is functioning as a closed system.
To function at their potential,
teams must share all
team-relevant informationBoth systems can work, provided that all team members are aware of the reality. But in project teams that are closed, team members are often unaware that they're closed. That is, the fact that the team is a closed system is itself a secret. And that disparity between reality and perception can lead to trouble. Even when team members are aware, closed systems face special risks. Here are just a few.
- Increased risk of bad decisions
- If team members believe that they have access to all information relevant to their own activities, when they actually don't, they might believe that they're making correct decisions and trade-offs when they actually aren't.
- Infringing the personal freedoms of team members
- Some information is so significant that it can affect personal decisions. For instance, if a fatal flaw is discovered, some team members might choose to move on to a new assignment. If the flaw is concealed, they might stay, thinking that all is well when it isn't.
- Re-inventing the wheel
- In closed systems, when someone discovers a problem and finds a workaround, there's a temptation to implement the workaround without revealing the problem. If the root of the problem is deep within the system, failing to reveal it prevents resolution at the root. Several people might discover the problem independently, each one implementing a separate — and possibly different — workaround.
- Management problems
- When a team is closed, and it hasn't discussed the choice to be open or closed, and when its culture professes the values of openness, any team members who discover the brutal truth could begin resenting the team leadership. They might feel manipulated and alienated, and their behavior might lead to management problems.
It's tempting to contain problems until we have repairs underway. But the tactic can be misleading and disrespectful, creating problems even bigger than the ones we were trying to avoid. Leaders who conceal truth from others lead others to conceal truth from them. Top
Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.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.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
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.
Related articles
More articles on Project Management:
Seven Ways to Get Nowhere
- Ever have the feeling that you're getting nowhere? You have the sense of movement, but you're making
no real progress towards the goal. How does this happen? What can you do about it?
Durable Agreements
- People at work often make agreements in which they commit to cooperate — to share resources, to
assist each other, or not to harm each other. Some agreements work. Some don't. What makes agreements durable?
Projects as Proxy Targets: I
- Some projects have detractors so determined to prevent project success that there's very little they
won't do to create conditions for failure. Here's Part I of a catalog of tactics they use.
Power Distance and Teams
- One of the attributes of team cultures is something called ``Em''power distance``/Em'', which is a measure
of the overall comfort people have with inequality in the distribution of power. Power distance can
determine how well a team performs when executing high-risk projects.
Cost Concerns: Comparisons
- When we assess the costs of different options for solving a problem, we must take care not to commit
a variety of errors in approach. These errors can lead to flawed decisions. One activity at risk for
error is comparing the costs of two options.
See also Project Management and Project Management for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident
- A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.
And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers
- Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.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 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed
