When you search the Web for tips about how to deal with people who chronically interrupt their peers at meetings, beware. Some tips work some of the time, and some do carry risks of their own. Here's Part III of some thoughts about commonly offered tips. See "Chronic Peer Interrupters: I," Point Lookout for May 30, 2018 for Part I.
- Be clear and unambiguous
- If chronic interrupters abruptly break into the conversation too often, they eventually create general resentment. So they must be clever. In one tactic, they use "interruption wedges" when they want to break in, because taking the floor from that point is less likely to arouse ire. One possible interruption wedge is ambiguity on the part of the person being interrupted. Anything that's somewhat unclear can serve. For example, suppose that the person about to be interrupted is describing a conversation with two males, Jim and Jeff, who together represent a vendor organization. Saying, "He said it would be delivered next week," could invite the interruption, "Who said, Jim or Jeff?"
- Pronouns are very handy interruption wedges. Avoid them. Also, avoid non-specific relative dates, like "next week," or "week after next." Say, instead, "Week of 12/3." Instead of "9 AM tomorrow," say, "9 AM Pacific time, tomorrow, Friday." If you're in the presence of a chronic peer interrupter who uses ambiguity wedges, it pays to be disgustingly specific.
- Be concise
- A crisp, direct delivery, trimmed of redundancy, detours, and other extras is less likely to be interrupted for two reasons. First, if you become known for being concise and to-the-point, people tend to listen up. Then, when chronic interrupters interrupt, they're more likely to look foolish, abusive, or rude. Second, because concise contributions are short, the time available for interrupting is short. Interrupting a short contribution is difficult because the interrupter must act quickly.
- Being Pronouns are very
wedges. Avoid them.consistently concise is tricky at first, but practice helps. After each meeting make a list of all your contributions, or anyone's contributions, verbatim if possible. Then rewrite them in fewer words. You'll get better at it.
- Speaking last won't help much
- An oft-recommended technique involves speaking last — waiting for nearly everyone to speak before making a contribution. The hope is that by that point chronic peer interrupters will have had all the opportunity they need to speak, and therefore they'll be less likely to interrupt someone who has waited politely for some time.
- This tactic can backfire. In effect, using it might be conceding the floor to the interrupters. But the real problem is that chronic peer interrupters do what they do not merely because of the need to contribute their ideas, but because interrupting others is an expression of power or dominance. Whenever someone else is speaking, the chronic peer interrupter must listen. In that situation, the power stances are inverted with respect to the favored configuration of the chronic peer interrupter, who then feels the need to "fix" the situation by interrupting.
- Set expectations
- If you surf around a bit, you can find recommendations that introducing your contribution by setting expectations can prevent interruptions. For example, you can start with "This is a complex argument, but bear with me," or, "I have just three points to make," or, "Give me just two minutes to lay out this story," or, "The last thing I'll add is…" or something analogous. Beware, though: long intros describing the structure of the contribution you're about to make can seem arrogant or condescending to some.
- But this technique works well if you're the recognized expert on the topic in question. Otherwise, in addition to condescension risk, it's vulnerable to itself being interrupted, because it gives the interrupters information about where you're going. And the assumption that chronic interrupters interrupt because they're unaware of how long you need to make your points isn't always correct. Chronic interrupters engaged in power or dominance displays are likely more concerned with displaying dominance than they are with whatever it is you have to say.
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 welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenhADPtjdgbhEOQUUrner@ChacSuoqiJepsKMitwzboCanyon.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 Effective Meetings:
- Take Regular Temperature Readings
- Team interactions are unimaginably complex. To avoid misunderstandings, offenses, omissions, and mistaken
suppositions, teams need open communications. But no one has a full picture of everything that's happening.
The Temperature Reading is a tool for surfacing hidden and invisible information, puzzles, appreciations,
frustrations, and feelings.
- Asking Brilliant Questions
- Your team is fortunate if you have even one teammate who regularly asks the questions that immediately
halt discussions and save months of wasted effort. But even if you don't have someone like that, everyone
can learn how to generate brilliant questions more often. Here's how.
- 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.
- Allocating Airtime: II
- Much has been said about people who don't get a fair chance to speak at meetings. We've even devised
processes intended to more fairly allocate speaking time. What's happening here?
- 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.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming June 27: Interrupting Others in Meetings Safely: I
- In meetings we sometimes feel the need to interrupt others to offer a view or information, or to suggest adjusting the process. But such interruptions carry risk of offense. How can we interrupt others safely? Available here and by RSS on June 27.
- And on July 4: Interrupting Others in Meetings Safely: II
- When we feel the need to interrupt someone who's speaking in a meeting, to offer a view or information, we would do well to consider (and mitigate) the risk of giving offense. Here are some techniques for interrupting the speaker in situations not addressed by the meeting's formal process. Available here and by RSS on July 4.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbreniKuoVWijIxcgYiJbner@ChacvQNEsYTolluXOpJroCanyon.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 Race to the South Pole: The Power of Agile Development
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald
Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen
had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished.
As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough. Lessons abound. Among the more important
lessons are those that demonstrate the power of the agile approach to project management and product
development. Read more about this program. Here's
a date for this program:
- Ohio National Insurance, 1 Financial Way, Blue Ash, OH: July
Monthly Meeting, Cincinnati
chapter of the International Institute of Business Analysis. Register now.
- Ohio National Insurance, 1 Financial Way, Blue Ash, OH: July 17, Monthly Meeting, Cincinnati chapter of the International Institute of Business Analysis. Register now.
- 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.