Toxic Disrupters: Tactics

Like all meetings, the meetings of small teams, boards, task forces, and commissions are vulnerable to disruption by determined individuals among their members. Disruption of these groups is sometimes helpful. Indeed, in many cases, disruption by a group member might be the only avenue that leads to a productive outcome. Usually, disruptions are unwelcome, even if they are productive and well intentioned.

But some unwelcome disruptions are toxic. They prevent the group — or, at least, they are intended to prevent the group — from producing a useful outcome. That's why it's important for members of small teams to be familiar with the strategies and tactics of toxic disrupters. In a post to come I'll address responses small groups can use to limit the damage toxic disrupters can do. In this post, I examine the tactics of toxic disrupters, and provide some insight into what makes them so effective.

A field guide for toxic disrupters

This post If members of small teams are familiar
with the strategies and tactics of toxic
disrupters, the team is better able to
limit the harm toxic disrupters can dois written as a set of recommendations for disrupters who want to be truly effective at preventing the small group from producing anything useful. I wrote them this way to make them clear to people who are among the other members of groups disrupted by toxic disrupters. They aren't recommendations, though they do sound as if they are.

In what follows, I use the names Ted (he/him) and Trish (she/her) to refer to the toxic disrupter.

Know (and violate) the group's norms and customs

Most groups have sets of norms and customs that prescribe acceptable and unacceptable behavior of group members. These norms and customs may be written or unwritten, and they may be honored to various degrees. Example: Meetings will start and end on time. Or: We will not interrupt each other.

To prevent the groups' achieving a specific goal, Ted violates outrageously whatever norm or custom supports achieving that goal. For example, if the meeting Chair is facilitating the discussion, interrupting the Chair violates the norm, "We will not interrupt each other." By disrespecting the Chair, Ted reduces the Chair's authority. If Ted is persistent and rude enough, most Chairs are unwilling to do what's necessary to maintain their authority. Ted makes progess towards his goal by making the Chair appear to be feckless, rather than powerful.

Demand attention

Control the focus of the group's attention. If the group is addressing Issue #3, Trish raises Issue #79. If they somehow manage to stay on Issue #3, she raises questions about the manner in which they pursue Issue #3. If the group has formal rules of procedure, she uses parliamentary objections, quorum calls, or anything at all to throw sand in the gears. If necessary, she engages in specious personal attacks and name-calling. Political incorrectness is a useful tool in this effort.

Disrupters had best be aware, though, that counter-attacks are likely if their tactics are too obviously aimed at focusing attention. Connect objections and deflections as closely as possible to the stated objective of the group, without actually advancing the group toward that objective.

Insist on an agenda that conflicts with the stated agenda

In any given meeting, there are usually opportunities to amend the stated agenda. For example, there is the casual question, "Does everyone approve of this agenda?" But the more spontaneous, unanticipated moments are more likely to be disruptive.

For example, consider asking questions of the form, "Is anyone else uncomfortable addressing this item with X unavailable?" X can be a person, a piece of information, the results of a pending decision by another body, and so on. Unnecessary delay, disguised as prudence, can be very disruptive.

Sow distrust

As a toxic disrupter, if you know of personal alliances between or among some of the members of the group, be aware that these folks probably speak with each other privately, out of your awareness. They can coordinate their activities to limit your ability to disrupt the group.

Do what you can to break up these alliances. Question the motives of these people, privately if necessary. Misquote individuals to each other to create distrust among them.

Last words

This post has explored an approach for limiting the harm toxic disrupters can do by first recognizing their strategies and tactics, and then taking appropriate action. One note of caution: distinguishing between toxic disrupters and other well-intentioned disrupters is tricky business. Limiting the ability of a well-intentioned disrupter to disrupt can be just as damaging as failing to limit the ability of a toxic disrupter to disrupt. Much depends on what you know about the disruptive individual outside the context of the small team. Use what you know. If you know little of the person, get to know him or her better.  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:

Dispersity Adversity

Geographically and culturally dispersed project teams are increasingly common, as we become more travel-averse and more bedazzled by communication technology. But people really do work better together face-to-face. Here are some tips for managing dispersed teams.

Irrational Self-Interest

When we try to influence others, especially large groups or entire companies, we sometimes create packages of incentives and disincentives that are intended to affect behavior. These strategies usually assume that people make choices on rational grounds. Is this assumption valid?

Blind Agendas

Effective meetings have agendas. But even if a meeting has an agenda, the hidden agendas of participants can cause trouble. Another source of trouble, less frequently recognized, is the blind agenda.

Problem Not-Solving

Group problem solving is a common purpose of meetings. Although much group problem solving is constructive, some patterns are useless or worse. Here are some of the more popular ways to engage in problem not-solving.

Rationalizing Creativity at Work: II

Creative thinking at work can be nurtured or encouraged, but not forced or compelled. Leaders who try to compel creativity because of very real financial and schedule pressures rarely get the results they seek. Here are examples of tactics people use in mostly-futile attempts to compel creativity.

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