Group decision-making can be so difficult that many believe that vesting decision-making authority in a single individual is always preferable. Yet, much of the difficulty is self-imposed. For many impasses groups encounter, the cause of the divisiveness is neither the group itself nor a clash of the personalities of its people. Rather, it is a trick of the mind that I call the Tyranny of Singular Nouns.
This problem arises when groups are engaged in debate that they regard inappropriately as requiring a unitary solution. Often, such issues could actually be resolved by solutions with multiple components. One cause of this error of thinking is the name we give to the issue. If that name is one we think of as singular, we're more likely to slip into the trap. For example, policy is a singular noun that sometimes leads us to seek an elegant, one-size-fits-all statement that covers all situations. If we can do so easily, that's fine. But when we can't, we might not actually need to find a unitary formulation. Too many debates are undertaken without first considering whether unitary resolution is truly necessary.
Here are four examples of debate topics that often generate unnecessary searches for singular resolutions.
- Assessing defect severity
- In product development, we usually consider defect severity to be a singular attribute. But defects affect different populations differently. Is it necessary that we reach a singular conclusion as to severity? Often, it is. But always?
- Formulating policy
- We usually regard policies as applying equally to all, but policies can have exclusions and allowances for special situations without necessarily eroding fairness.
- Choosing solutions to problems
- When we seek solutions to problems, we tend to hold singular solutions in highest regard. But workable solutions with multiple components, available now, can be superior to elegant solutions not yet in hand.
- Estimating cost and schedule
- When we're undertaking something for the Workable solutions with multiple
components, available now, can
be superior to elegant solutions
not yet in handfirst time, we can't anticipate every challenge. To account for uncertainty, our estimates must be expressed as ranges, rather than single numbers or dates. To insist upon a single figure for cost or duration is naïve.
The impulse to seek singular resolution might be related to the relatively recent (in cultural terms) innovation of mass production, which depends on uniformity. As a culture, we're still enamored of mass production.
But modern manufacturing methods now allow for variety. We've moved beyond one-size-fits-all. And when we're "manufacturing" non-physical things — ideas, policies, estimates, and so on — one-size-fits-all might be precisely the wrong approach.
Educate your teams in the Tyranny of Singular Nouns. When they do seek singular resolution to an issue, let it not be driven by a reflexive urge for uniformity. Let it be driven by reasoned, conscious choice. 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? rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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:
- Running Your Personal Squirrel Cage
- As Glen rounded the corner behind the old oak, entering the last mile of his morning run, he suddenly
realized that he was thinking about picking up the dry cleaning tomorrow and changing his medical appointment.
Physically, he was jogging in a park, but mentally, he was running in a squirrel cage. How does this
happen? What can we do about it?
- Assumptions and the Johari Window: II
- The roots of both creative and destructive conflict can often be traced to the differing assumptions
of the parties to the conflict. Here's Part II of an essay on surfacing these differences using a tool
called the Johari window.
- Discussion Distractions: I
- Meetings could be far more productive, if only we could learn to recognize and prevent the distractions
that lead us off topic and into the woods. Here is Part I of a small catalog of distractions frequently
seen in meetings.
- Guidelines for Sharing "Resources"
- Often, team members belong to several different teams. The leaders of teams whose members have divided
responsibilities must sometimes contend with each other for the efforts and energies of the people they
share. Here are some suggestions for sharing people effectively.
- How to Get Out of Firefighting Mode: II
- We know we're in firefighting mode when a new urgent problem disrupts our work on another urgent problem,
and the new problem makes it impossible to use the solution we thought we had for some third problem
we were also working on. Here's Part II of a set of suggestions for getting out of firefighting mode.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming November 27: Implicit Interrogations
- Investigations at work can begin with implicit interrogations — implicit because they're unannounced and unacknowledged. The goal is to determine what people did or knew without revealing that an investigation is underway. When asked, those conducting these interrogations often deny they're doing it. What's the nature of implicit interrogations? Available here and by RSS on November 27.
- And on December 4: Implicit Interrogation Tactics
- When one person tries surreptitiously to extract information from another at work, an implicit interrogation is taking place. Here are seven tactics that people use to interrogate others without revealing what they're doing. Available here and by RSS on December 4.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.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.