Interrupting Others in Meetings Safely: III

This is Part III of my series on managing the risks of interrupting fellow attendees at meetings. In Part I I examined assigning roles that have prior group approval to interrupt when certain conditions are met. I also described a "process check" custom that enables attendees to halt the proceedings when a violation of norms has occurred. In Part II I explored three approaches that any attendee in any meeting could use, and examined the risks of each. In this Part III I examine three more methods individuals can use. For convenience, I'll use the name Inez for the interrupter, and Steve for the speaker.

Wit

Wit and humor are frequently confused, possibly because the boundary between them is so fuzzy. Some remarks can be both witty and funny, while others are clearly one or the other. Both are helpful to the prospective interrupter, but wit can be more effective, because it's usually clever or insightful, and it might be more directly connected to whatever is happening in the present moment. And the "wit bar" is actually fairly low. Example: "I agree it's a complex problem, but many complex problems have simple solutions. Let's search a little while longer."

Because witty remarks can be difficult to generate on the fly, it's most fortunate that they need not be original. Having a stock of them in your mind is both helpful and possible. For example, when the topic is continuous, incremental change, it's useful to cite the Chinese proverb that advises, "Two leaps per chasm is fatal." Become a collector of witty aphorisms: there are dozens of books and ebooks available. Chiasmus is a particularly powerful form: Never Let a Fool Kiss You or a Kiss Fool You. Or check Web sites such as: "50 most inspirational quotes from books."

As with all interruptions, brevity is power.

Deftness

One form of deftness is offering your comments in the form of questions, especially if directed at the person interrupted. Examples: "Have you considered…," "Is it worth contacting them about it…," "Is it possible that those two systems are interacting in some other way…," "Do you know how the regulators would react to that idea…"

Questions Because witty remarks can be
difficult to generate on the fly,
it's most fortunate that
they need not be originalcan be effective because they inherently cede the floor to someone else other than the interrupter. They're less likely to be seen as tools for seizing control of the discussion and therefore less likely to give offense.

Confidence — and courage

Courage is most useful when you disagree with the speaker. If you're confident of your position, and your relationship is solid, directness might be most effective. Examples: "I see it a little differently…," "I have to disagree on that…," or "We actually found them to be very reliable on the Marigold work…"

If there's room for debate or uncertainty, a less direct approach might work better: "I've heard from Erica in New York that their approach is getting great results. How do our projections compare?" Note the use of our instead of your. Our is less confrontational.

Even less directly, Inez can challenge Steve's position by combining his position with all others, offering a radically different perspective: "Here's a wild idea — what if…" Being radically different, and being at odds with all previous thinking — not just Steve's — enables Inez to avoid singling out only Steve. He's less likely to feel targeted.

Most important, take care not to embarrass or ridicule any fellow attendee, ever. If you do, some might see your interruptions as thin cloaks for personal attacks, even if you're innocent of any such motive. People who make this interpretation might then counterattack on the basis of your speaking out of turn. Whatever you were trying to accomplish might then be moved out of your reach. The consequences for you could be long lasting, extending into future meetings. First in this series   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.

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:

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.

Misleading Vividness

Group decision-making usually entails discussion. When contributions to that discussion include vivid examples, illustrations, or stories, the group can be at risk of making a mistaken decision.

When the Chair Is a Bully: II

Assertiveness by chairs of meetings isn't a problem in itself, but it becomes problematic when the chair's dominance deprives the meeting of contributions from some of its members. Here's Part II of our exploration of the problem of bully chairs.

Contributions, Open and Closed

We can classify contributions to discussions according to the likelihood that they stimulate new thought. The more open they are, the more they stimulate new thought. How can we encourage open contributions?

Stone-Throwers at Meetings: I

One class of disruptions in meetings includes the tactics of stone-throwers — people who exploit low-cost tactics to disrupt the meeting and distract all participants so as to obstruct progress. How do they do it, and what can the meeting chair do?

See also Effective Meetings and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming August 21: Perfectionism and Avoidance

Avoiding tasks we regard as unpleasant, boring, or intimidating is a pattern known as procrastination. Perfectionism is another pattern. The interplay between the two makes intervention a bit tricky. Available here and by RSS on August 21.

And on August 28: Playing at Work

Eight hours a day — usually more — of meetings, phone calls, reading and writing email and text messages, briefing others or being briefed, is enough to drive anyone around the bend. To re-energize, to clarify one's perspective, and to restore creative capacity, play is essential. Play at work, I mean. Available here and by RSS on August 28.

Coaching services

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

Public seminars

The Race to the South Pole: Lessons in Leadership

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. But to organizational leaders, business analysts, project sponsors, and project managers, the story is fascinating. We'll use the history of this event to explore lessons in leadership and its application to organizational efforts. A fascinating and refreshing look at leadership from the vantage point of history. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:

• Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio 44017: November 7, Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute. 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.

• A recording of a program presented June 29, 2017, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.