Groups facing divisive issues risk making serious mistakes unknowingly. In group cultures accustomed to voting, formally or informally, people tend to measure the strength of alignments in terms of headcount. This perception obscures the passion people feel about the issues at hand, and it can lead us to make avoidable errors. Here are some insights about divisive issues.
- Headcount doesn't measure passion
- Whatever the actual numbers on any side of a question, they don't measure the intensity of feeling of group members. That intensity can determine how well the group works together after the decision.
- Consider how you would feel if you were one of those whose strong feelings the majority discounted. Work hard to devise a solution that excites no strong feelings of rejection on the part of any group member.
- Consider both content and consequences
- Making choices about divisive issues creates consequences for group cohesion. Focusing only on the content — the issue itself — and failing to consider the feelings of those who disagree is a risky approach.
- As a group member, include both content-related matters and the consequences for the group as you consider your choices. A legacy of bitterness and alienation can undermine the outcome you desire.
- Differing passions evolve differently
- After the decision, the passion people felt changes in different ways, depending upon whether the passion favored or opposed the decision. The passion of those who favored it is more likely to abate; the passion of those who opposed it is more likely to intensify.
- If the chosen solution excited strong contrary passions, beware their ongoing intensification. Prepare by finding ways to defuse the tension, possibly with other decisions in related areas.
- Refrain from imposing unsought advice
- Advice to As a group member, include
both content-related matters
and the consequences for the
group as you consider
your choicesthose about to prevail to "consider the consequences of narrow victory," can sound like threats or blackmail from disgruntled losers. Advice to those who opposed the decision to "put your feelings aside and move on," can feel like a fresh insult.
- The urge on the part of one party to advise the other to surrender or relent is actually an index of the poverty of wisdom in the decision itself.
Victors in divisive debates, whether decided by vote or fiat, sometimes argue, "We cannot be held hostage to threats or bitterness. We had to do what's best for the group." This argument is seductively simplistic — it addresses a nasty problem by creating an even nastier problem. The real problem — the difference in perceptions about the issue at hand — must be resolved. It cannot be resolved by alienating those who stand on the other side of the issue. That tactic weakens the group, perhaps fatally. 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!
For more about the Pyrrhic War and other events of the early development of Rome, see The Beginnings of Rome: Italy From the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (Circa 1,000 to 264 B.C.) by Tim Cornell. Order from Amazon.com
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenMecNeYNgShLzVvTFner@ChacSdsHeBVpJSgapOBNoCanyon.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 Conflict Management:
- Is It Blame or Is It Accountability?
- When we seek those accountable for a particular failure, we risk blaming them instead, because many
of us confuse accountability with blame. What's the difference between them? How can we keep blame at bay?
- Stonewalling: I
- Stonewalling is a tactic of obstruction used by those who wish to stall the forward progress of some
effort. Whether the effort is a rival project, an investigation, or just the work of a colleague, the
stonewaller hopes to gain advantage. What can you do about stonewalling?
- Tangled Thread Troubles
- Even when we use a facilitator to manage a discussion, managing a queue for contributors can sometimes
lead to problems. Here's a little catalog of those difficulties.
- OODA at Work
- OODA is a model of decision-making that's especially useful in rapidly evolving environments, such as
combat, marketing, politics, and emergency management. Here's a brief overview.
- Creating Toxic Conflict: II
- Some supervisors seem to behave as if part of their job description is creating toxic conflict among
their subordinates. It isn't really, of course, but here's a collection of methods bad managers use
that make trouble.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming November 21: Make Suggestions Privately
- Suggesting a better way of doing things can sometimes backfire surprisingly and intensely. Making suggestions privately reduces that risk, but introduces a different risk. Available here and by RSS on November 21.
- And on November 28: Wacky Words of Wisdom: VI
- Adages, aphorisms, and "words of wisdom" seem valid often enough that we accept them as universal and permanent. Most aren't. Here's Part VI of a collection of widely held beliefs that can be misleading at work. Available here and by RSS on November 28.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenCMqwJCIZbcGmnkPyner@ChacAeyODoOQlmbNzzmLoCanyon.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, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
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.