Contributions, Open and Closed

In discussions at meetings, we make contributions. We can classify them according to their degrees of openness. For example, a relatively closed contribution is an announcement that our Monday meeting will be on Tuesday because elevator D in the Tower is off line for maintenance. This contribution is mostly factual, and although we might need to address its consequences, it's presented as if we do not. Closed contributions indicate no path forward to deliberations. They might even indicate, as above, that no further discussion is needed. A closed contribution by itself doesn't invite discussion.

By contrast, an open contribution suggests that something is unresolved. The group can then choose whether or when to discuss it. Open contributions transfer control of the discussion to the group.

Any contribution made at the right time, to the right group, with an appropriate degree of openness, can be valuable. Any contribution made at the wrong time or to the wrong group can create problems. Also troublesome are contributions that have inappropriate degrees of openness, independent of timing or choice of audience.

When we make open contributions about issues that don't need discussion, we risk wasting time. Because this problem is so obvious, I won't deal with it here. The more subtle problems arise when we make closed contributions about matters that do need discussion. Here are some tips for encouraging open contributions.

Enrich existing threads

One example of extending or re-opening an existing discussion thread is expanding on a point previously made. Enrich the thread by showing how it leads in intriguing directions, or pose a novel question about it, or ask for clarification.

Support open contributions of others, or open them

When someone else offers an open contribution, support it. Pursue any leads it suggests, or ask the contributor to "say more." Using these tactics for contributions that are inappropriately closed encourages their contributors to restate their contributions in more open forms.

Propose open contribution generators

An open Problems arise when we
make closed contributions
about matters that
do need discussioncontribution generator is a comment, question, or exercise that generates open contributions. For example, a contributor can ask, "If we had an answer to Question Q, what new solutions to Problem P would become available?" Or, "If we had a solution to Problem P, what would we have done to get it?"

Propose generator generators

A generator of open contribution generators is a contribution that suggests that the group focus on generating more open contributions. For example, for groups unaware of the distinction between open and closed contributions, a proposal to discuss that distinction could be a generator, while a proposal to survey types of contributions that generate open contributions could be a generator generator.

Finally, differences in personal preferences for cognitive closure can lead to differences in the degree of openness of contributions. What can you do to encourage openness of your own contributions? Or the contributions of others?  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

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 Meetings:

Mastering Q and A

The question-and-answer exchanges that occur during or after presentations rarely add much to the overall effort. But how you deal with questions can be a decisive factor in how your audience evaluates you and your message.

Remote Facilitation in Synchronous Contexts: I

Whoever facilitates your distributed meetings — whether a dedicated facilitator or the meeting chair — will discover quickly that remote facilitation presents special problems. Here's a little catalog of those problems, and some suggestions for addressing them.

What Groupthink Isn't

The term groupthink is tossed around fairly liberally in conversation and on the Web. But it's astonishing how often it's misused and misunderstood. Here are some examples.

Characterization Risk

To characterize is to offer a description of a person, event, or concept. Characterizations are usually judgmental, and usually serve one side of a debate. And they often make trouble.

Would Anyone Object?

When groups consider whether to adopt proposals, some elect to poll everyone with a question of the form, "Would anyone object if X?" It's a risky approach, because it can lead to damaging decisions that open discussion in meetings can avoid.

See also Effective Meetings and Effective Meetings 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