Professional facilitators try to ensure that participants have opportunities to contribute. But many meetings are run by team leads, managers, and project managers, whose focus is often the content of the conversation, rather than the form it takes. Some meetings, especially smaller meetings, aren't facilitated at all. When groups make no attempt — or try but fail — to ensure that all those who want to contribute can actually contribute, two results occur with some frequency. First, these groups miss out on the contributions and perspectives that are suppressed. And second, the participants who can't participate can become frustrated and withdrawn.
The consequences can be severe for small groups, because of the significance of the loss of access to the thinking and energy of even a single member. If you're a member of a small group or team, or if you attend small meetings that aren't professionally facilitated, what techniques can you use to break into the conversation? Here are some possibilities.
- Know thyself
- Knowing your own feelings is a first step. Given your status, your areas of responsibility, and the topics and issues at hand, do you feel that you're getting a fair share of time in the conversation? Suppressing or denying your feelings elevates the probability of anger and outburst. Acknowledge what you feel. See "Ethical Influence: I," Point Lookout for July 4, 2007, for more.
- Check for rules
- Some of us carry Because everyone has unique
responsibilities, and because
meeting topics do vary, equal
time isn't an appropriate
standard of fairness
in most meetingsaround over-generalized rules that we adopted unquestioningly as children. For example, one such rule is, "I must never interrupt others." It's usually a good rule to live by, except when others don't feel obliged to return the courtesy. Either find a way to propagate courtesy, or transform your rule to something like, "I must treat others as courteously as I can reasonably expect them to treat me." See "Heavy Burdens: Should, Always, Must, and Never," Point Lookout for February 27, 2002, for more. - Know the situation
- Because everyone has unique responsibilities, and because meeting topics do vary, equal time isn't an appropriate standard of fairness in most meetings. The time allocated to each individual depends on the situation. Objectively determining what is an appropriate share is difficult. Deciding that there is a problem requires careful consideration.
- Know the competition
- When some people have difficulty getting into the conversation, competition for time is often a contributing cause. If some participants insist on time out of proportion to their ability to contribute, wait for a particularly egregious incident. Then raise the issue. You're more likely to be successful if you raise the issue in the team's interest, by demonstrating that someone other than yourself has been unable to contribute.
- Ask questions
- In a competitive atmosphere, questions are more likely to be welcome than are assertions, because they're less threatening. And the social credit earned by asking a brilliant question can be just as significant as making the equivalent assertion. See "Asking Brilliant Questions," Point Lookout for November 22, 2006, for more.
Many other tactics also work. Send me your favorites and I'll spread them around. Top Next Issue
Do you spend your days scurrying from meeting to meeting? Do you ever wonder if all these meetings are really necessary? (They aren't) Or whether there isn't some better way to get this work done? (There is) Read 101 Tips for Effective Meetings to learn how to make meetings much more productive and less stressful — and a lot more rare. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.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 Effective Communication at Work:
- High Falutin' Goofy Talk
- Business speech and business writing are sometimes little more than high falutin' goofy talk, filled
with pretentious, overused images and puff phrases of unknown meaning. Here are some phrases that are
so common that we barely notice them.
- Some Truths About Lies: III
- Detecting lies by someone intent on misrepresentation is an important skill for executives, managers,
project managers, and just about anyone involved in knowledge-oriented organizations. Here's Part III
of our little collection of lie detection techniques.
- Reframing Revision Resentment: II
- When we're required to revise something previously produced — prose, designs, software, whatever,
we sometimes experience frustration with those requiring the revisions. Here are some alternative perspectives
that can be helpful.
- I Don't Understand: II
- Unclear, incomplete, or ambiguous statements are problematic, in part, because we need to seek clarification.
How can we do that without seeming to be hostile, threatening, or disrespectful?
- Obscuring Ignorance
- Some people are uncomfortable revealing that they have limited understanding of topics related to the
issues at hand. They can't allow themselves to ask, "Pardon me, what does X mean?" Here are
a few of the techniques they use to obscure their ignorance.
See also Effective Communication at Work and Workplace Politics for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming July 3: Additive bias…or Not: II
- Additive bias is a cognitive bias that many believe contributes to bloat of commercial products. When we change products to make them more capable, additive bias might not play a role, because economic considerations sometimes favor additive approaches. Available here and by RSS on July 3.
- And on July 10: On Delegating Accountability: I
- As the saying goes, "You can't delegate your own accountability." Despite wide knowledge of this aphorism, people try it from time to time, especially when overcome by the temptation of a high-risk decision. What can you delegate, and how can you do it? Available here and by RSS on July 10.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.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
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed