On Schedule Conflicts

When you need to attend (or want to attend) two meetings scheduled for the same time slot, you'll eventually resolve the conflict somehow, because you can't attend both. To resolve the schedule conflict, you must address two issues. The first is whether you'll attend the one that matters most, and the second is whether this schedule conflict will occur again. This post provides guidance for those seeking to resolve both issues.

Four factors that increase the incidence of schedule conflicts

Schedule conflicts are unavoidable. But when schedule conflicts are common, they might indicate that something is amiss. That's why it's useful to consider possible implications of a high incidence of schedule conflicts. Here are four factors that can contribute to an elevated level of schedule conflicts.

Too many projects for the available staff

If you have a high-level role in your organization, or if your role is critical for multiple projects or functions, schedule conflicts are less common for you than for others, because people tend to schedule things to accommodate you. That's unfortunate, because that practice insulates you from the level of double booking that others experience. And that insulation can delay your realizing that there's too much happening in the organization — too many projects, too many functions, or maybe just too many meetings.

Consider adopting an alternative organizational structure that has fewer projects or functions that require the attention of someone in your role.

Micromanagement

Perhaps one cause of the scheduling conflicts isn't the need for you to be in two places at once, but is instead your own desire to be. An elevated level of schedule conflicts could be a signal that you're engaging in micromanagement.

If you've delegated responsibility for a project or function to others, let them execute. Make certain that they have what they need to do the job, and then get out of their way.

Too many meetings: Time-slot squatting

Time-slot squatting is the wasteful practice of conducting a "regular" meeting in a regular time slot whether or not the meeting is necessary. Usually the time slot is on a specific day of the week, either weekly or bi-weekly. By conducting the meeting regularly, the meeting owner hopes to keep the designated time slot open for all attendees. The fear is that if the meeting isn't held regularly, other meeting owners will be able to "claim" the slot for themselves. If that happens, the fearful meeting owner believes, finding a time to hold the meeting when all can attend will become difficult even if the meeting is necessary.

Time-slot Time-slot squatting is the wasteful practice
of conducting a "regular" meeting in a
regular time slot whether or not
the meeting is actually necessarysquatting feeds on itself. That is, because those who refrain from the practice quickly find themselves unable to find conflict-free times for meetings, there is an incentive to adopt the practice. The problem can be resolved, but only at the organizational level. The key to resolution is reducing the average number of meetings each person must attend. And that might require reducing the number of projects "in flight."

Toxic political conflict

Some double booking is intentional. For example, suppose Person A must — absolutely must — attend Meeting #1. And suppose the agenda of Meeting #2 includes an action that Person A opposes. To ensure that Person A cannot attend Meeting #2, Chair #2 (the owner of Meeting #2) schedules Meeting #2 to conflict with Meeting #1. This can happen as a result of a political rivalry between Person A and Chair #2, or some other rivalry for which Person A and/or Chair #2 are proxies.

This sort of thing arises from unresolved toxic political conflict. The problem here isn't one of scheduling. The parties to the conflict must resolve the conflict, possibly with "supervisory encouragement."

Last words

Knowledge of the incidence of schedule conflicts can be helpful in focusing the attention of Management on addressing this issue. Fortunately, the organization's calendar software probably has all the data required to determine the frequency of schedule conflicts. By weighting the importance of each meeting, we can create a metric that exposes trends in schedule conflicts and their importance. Together with data about cancellations, absenteeism unrelated to time off, and the incidence of rescheduling, we can produce a clear representation of the scale and impact of the problem.  Top    Next Issue

More about micromanagement

There Are No Micromanagers  [January 7, 2004]

If you're a manager who micromanages, you're probably trying as best you can to help your organization meet its responsibilities. Still, you might feel that people are unhappy — that whatever you're doing isn't working. There is another way.

Are You Micromanaging Yourself?  [November 24, 2004]

Feeling distrusted and undervalued, we often attribute the problem to the behavior of others — to the micromanager who might be mistreating us. We tend not to examine our own contributions to the difficulty. Are you micromanaging yourself?

Managing Pressure: Communications and Expectations  [December 13, 2006]

Pressed repeatedly for "status" reports, you might guess that they don't want status — they want progress. Things can get so nutty that responding to the status requests gets in the way of doing the job. How does this happen and what can you do about it? Here's Part I of a little catalog of tactics and strategies for dealing with pressure.

Managing Pressure: The Unexpected  [December 20, 2006]

When projects falter, we expect demands for status and explanations. What's puzzling is how often this happens to projects that aren't in trouble. Here's Part II of a catalog of strategies for managing pressure.

Managing Pressure: Milestones and Deliveries  [December 27, 2006]

Pressed repeatedly for "status" reports, you might guess that they don't want status — they want progress. Things can get so nutty that responding to the status requests gets in the way of doing the job. How does this happen and what can you do about it? Here's Part III of a set of tactics and strategies for dealing with pressure.

How to Tell If You Work for a Nanomanager  [March 7, 2007]

By now, we've all heard of micromanagers, and some have experienced micromanagement firsthand. Some of us have even micromanaged others. But there's a breed of micromanagers whose behavior is so outlandish that they need a category of their own.

Reverse Micromanagement  [July 18, 2007]

Micromanagement is too familiar to too many of us. Less familiar is inappropriate interference in the reverse direction — in the work of our supervisors or even higher in the chain. Disciplinary action isn't always helpful, especially when some of the causes of reverse micromanagement are organizational.

Lateral Micromanagement  [September 10, 2008]

Lateral micromanagement is the unwelcome intrusion by one co-worker into the responsibilities of another. Far more than run-of-the-mill bossiness, it's often a concerted attempt to gain organizational power and rank, and it is toxic to teams.

Bottlenecks: I  [February 4, 2015]

Some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks." The people around them repeatedly find themselves stuck, awaiting responses or decisions. Why does this happen and what are the costs?

Bottlenecks: II  [February 11, 2015]

When some people take on so much work that they become "bottlenecks," they expose the organization to risks. Managing those risks is a first step to ending the bottlenecking pattern.

What Micromanaging Is and Isn't  [April 14, 2021]

Micromanaging is a dysfunctional pattern of management behavior, involving interference in the work others are supposedly doing. Confusion about what it is and what it isn't makes effective response difficult.

On Schedule Conflicts  [May 10, 2023]

Schedule conflicts happen from time to time, even when the organization is healthy and all is well. But when schedule conflicts are common, they might indicate that the organization is trying to do too much with too few people.

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:

Our Last Meeting Together

You can find lots of tips for making meetings more effective — many at my own Web site. Most are directed toward the chair, or the facilitator if you have one. Here are some suggestions for everybody.

Favor Symmetric Virtual Meetings

Virtual meetings are notorious for generating more frustration than useful output. One cause of the difficulties is asymmetry in the way we connect to virtual meetings.

Workplace Memes

Some patterns of workplace society reduce organizational effectiveness in ways that often escape our notice. Here are four examples.

Brainstorming and Speedstorming: I

Recent research suggests that brainstorming might not be as effective as we would like to believe it is. An alternative, speedstorming, might have some advantages for some teams solving some problems.

Formulaic Utterances: I

With all due respect is an example of a category of linguistic forms known as formulaic utterances. They differ across languages and cultures, but I speculate that their functions are near universal. In the workplace, using them can be constructive — or not.

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