You've probably seen the FedEx logo, and by now, maybe you know that in the negative space between the E and the x is a rightward-pointing arrow. The arrow is there by intention, says Lindon Leader, who designed the logo. But if you know the Roman alphabet, you probably don't see the arrow unless you already know it's there.
The difficulty of seeing it comes from the frame of reference that readers habitually use when they see writing or printing. They look at the letters, not the spaces between them. People who are unfamiliar with Roman letters have much less difficulty seeing the arrow.
And when we see flocks of birds, we see the flocks, rather than the individual birds, and not the spaces between the birds. This habitual choice of reference frame is perhaps part of what makes many of the etchings of M.C. Escher so fascinating. He calls upon us to look at the individual birds in the flocks, and at the spaces between the birds.
When we choose our frame of reference consciously, we can see many things that would otherwise escape our notice. Consider the business meeting. For many, the reference frame of choice is the content of the discussion and how we're doing personally in the often-competitive tussle to control it.
Sometimes meetings need
mere contentA useful alternative frame is that of the group. In that frame, we can ask, "How's the group doing?" Here are questions we can ask in that frame.
- Energy level
- Are people engaged? Do they arrive on time and stay through till the end? Is there a good amount of laughter? Or are they disengaged? Are they fiddling with their Blackberries? Doodling?
- Does the group maintain focus? Can they stay on topic, or are they whipsawing from one irrelevant point to another? Can they converge to conclusions, or do they often fail to reach decisions?
- Contribution rate
- Do people offer contributions at a reasonable rate? Or do they interrupt, over-talking each other or raising their voices? Or do they sit silently when someone poses a question, too fearful to risk offering a comment?
- Viewpoint multiplicity
- Does the group welcome diverse perspectives? Does it seek fresh views proactively when they aren't in evidence?
- Has the group evolved into a set of "political parties" whose composition and positions are rigidly consistent? Are they unable to reach joint decisions? Can you reliably predict who will ally with whom on a given question? Is one individual a designated pariah?
To make meetings more productive, groups sometimes need contributions that reach beyond mere content. If you change your frame of reference, and you notice what contributions the group really needs, you might find new ways to contribute to the meeting, to help lead it towards true achievement. Top Next Issue
The article you've been reading is an archived issue of Point Lookout, my weekly newsletter. I've been publishing it since January, 2001, free to all subscribers, over the Web, and via RSS. You can help keep it free by donating either as an individual or as an organization. You'll receive in return my sincere thanks — and the comfort of knowing that you've helped to propagate insights and perspectives that can help make our workplaces a little more human-friendly. More
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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:
- When we steer the discussion away from issues to attack the credibility, motives, or character of our
debate partners, we often resort to a technique known as the ad hominem attack. It's unfair, it's unethical,
and it leads to bad, expensive decisions that we'll probably regret.
- Astonishing Successes
- When we have successes that surprise us, we do feel good, but beyond that, our reactions are sometimes
self-defeating. What happens when we experience unanticipated success, and how can we handle it better?
- How to Procrastinate
- You probably know many techniques for procrastinating, and use them regularly, but vociferously deny
doing so. That's what makes this such a delicate subject that I've been delaying writing this article.
Well, those days are over.
- The Good, the Bad, and the Complicated
- In fiction and movies, the world is often simple. There's a protagonist, a goal, and a series of obstacles.
The protagonists and goals are good, and the obstacles are bad. Real life is more complicated.
- Healthy Practices
- Some organizational cultures are healthy; some aren't. How can you tell whether your organizational
culture is healthy? Here are some indicators.
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 rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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.