Red Flags: I

The use of actual red flags to warn others of looming danger traces back some 400 years that we know of. Seventeenth-century warships flew red flags to indicate they were preparing for imminent military engagement. In some rail systems, before the introduction of colored lights, red semaphores were used to signal trains to stop. That there are many other examples of red flag warnings probably accounts for the use of the term red flag to mean a general indicator of trouble ahead.

A catalog of red flags for workplace collaborations could provide a handy checklist for determining when it might be time to intervene, or shut it down, or perhaps, move on to some other less fraught engagement. In that spirit I offer a list of red flags in three groups. This Part I emphasizes red flags associated with toxic conflict and voluntary turnover. In the next post, I'll describe red flags associated with communication, and in the post after that, red flags associated with abuse of power.

Toxic conflict

Creative conflict in collaborative work is essential to achieving high-quality outcomes. Creative conflict ensures that we test all ideas and account for all relevant viewpoints.

Toxic conflict is something else. In toxic conflict, the participants employ abusive personal attacks and threats, and abuse their political power in their efforts to resolve their differences. Although the group does reach a joint decision regarding the issue at hand, that decision is not based on the merits of the question. Instead, the decision is based on the relative political power of the contenders, and on their willingness and ability to devise tactics that destroy their opponents' careers, or failing that, to curtail their abilities to respond effectively.

If toxic conflict is repeated often enough, or if it occurs in the context of important decisions, it can cause the group to reach decisions that compromise its eventual success.

Capable people finding other things to do

Top contributors and leaders generally have alternatives. They need not remain in any position unless they want to. Because they do move on voluntarily when they learn of opportunities elsewhere, losing capable people occasionally isn't necessarily a red flag. It's the price of hiring capable people.

But an elevated An elevated frequency of capable
people moving on to more appealing
assignments can indicate serious troublefrequency of capable people moving on can indicate serious trouble. Another related indicator can be the inability of the organization to successfully recruit people with required levels of capability. Regard these phenomena as potential indicators that capable people are assessing the organization's health as questionable.

Leadership team volatility

In addition to the loss of capable people described above, there is a special factor associated with the exit of people from leadership positions. Organizational leaders are often aware of conditions that threaten organizational health — conditions that others might not be aware of. In some cases, it is the leader himself or herself who has brought about those conditions.

This privileged insight can cause leaders to make investment decisions that are supposedly prohibited by law. And some investment decisions are legal but revealing, such as a decision not to exercise options to purchase shares in the company. But these matters are usually well cloaked, and although they might indeed be red flags, they're invisible to most people.

In any case, elevated incidence of sudden exits of persons in leadership roles can indicate trouble ahead — or trouble that has already arrived, but which hasn't yet been recognized.

In next week's edition, we'll examine red flags associated with communication.   Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

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 Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

Appreciate Differences

In group problem solving, diversity of opinion and healthy, reasoned debate ensure that our conclusions take into account all the difficulties we can anticipate. Lock-step thinking — and limited debate — expose us to the risk of unanticipated risk.

Some Limits of Root Cause Analysis

Root Cause Analysis uses powerful tools for finding the sources of process problems. The approach has been so successful that it has become a way of thinking about organizational patterns. Yet, resolving organizational problems this way sometimes works — and sometimes fails. Why?

One Cost of Split Assignments

Sometimes management practices have unintended consequences. To reduce costs, we keep staff ranks thin, but that leads to split assignments for those with rare skills. Here's one way split assignments can lead to higher costs.

Risk Management Risk: II

Risk Management Risk is the risk that a particular risk management plan is deficient. Here are some guidelines for reducing risk management risk arising from risk interactions and change.

Time Slot Recycling: The Risks

When we can't begin a meeting because some people haven't arrived, we sometimes cancel the meeting and hold a different one, with the people who are in attendance. It might seem like a good way to avoid wasting time, but there are risks.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.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