|
Question:
Our current business climate
places huge demands on me and my direct reports. We must work
through some hard issues together, and, if we can, find innovative
ways to approach what we are faced with.
However, our management meetings
are in a rut, what happens is almost predictable. Sakai and Paula
seem to always carry the meetings, even if the subject isn't
in their area of expertise! They are very outgoing, and talkative.
It also isn't unusual for them to clash a little as we try to
work together.
At the same time we almost never
hear from Maria or Peter. Both of them have extensive experience
and valuable insight into the issues we are faced with.
I am frustrated. Can you give
me some ideas as to how I might better handle the situation?
Collaborations
Response:
We can give you a number of suggestions.
First, a solid guiding principle for any manager is to actively
manage the level of participation in your group. Much too often
we focus entirely on the business at hand and ignore managing
and influencing the dynamics of the group.
The challenges
with dominant team members
Those members of any group who
are most dominant, or extroverted, i.e. Sakai and Paula, present
several potential problems to the group. (These problems are
compounded if other members of the group perceive the more dominant
members to not place high value on teamwork and cooperation.)
The most typical potential problems are:
More dominant members use the
lion's share of the time available, not always in the service
of the group's objectives - but they use up the 'air' time.
Next, inevitably those more dominant
members will clash sooner or later. There is only so much time
available when the group meets. The more dominant members eventually
compete with each other for that time. It is likely that this
will happen early in the group's history rather than later, so
expect it.
Third, such conflict may become
habitual, repeating itself over and over. In such situations
it is as though the group is following a script when it meets.
The meeting starts; discussion begins; the dominant members draw
up the battle lines; other members decide with whom, if anyone,
to side; and, it's another 'typical' management meeting.
The challenges
with more submissive team members
Fourth, members less dominant
or more introverted, for example Maria or Peter, will not compete
for 'air' time, even if they have more experience, and/or better
solutions. They will not risk competing with the more dominant
members.
Fifth, the less dominant members,
even though dissatisfied with the influence on the group by the
more dominant members will, by their lack of participation create
even more of a vacuum, which the more dominant members are only
too willing to fill.
Finally, the lack of participation
by the more introverted, less dominant members may easily be
interpreted as disinterest, detachment, or lack of interest in
the current business issues.
These are 'normal and typical'
problems present in almost any group. How can one deal most effectively
with them?
Suggested
solutions
In a general sense, work toward
minimizing the participation differential between the more active,
dominant, and extroverted members and those who
are more quiet, passive, and introverted. Manage the interactions
more appropriately so that the dominant members do not 'dominate'
and the more passive members are 'activated.'
This is best initiated in private
and then, if necessary, enforced in public (Depending on how
dominant the extroverted members are public enforcement will
quite possibly be necessary.)
We would suggest individually
talking with Sakai and Paula, saying something such as this:
"I really appreciate your ideas and energetic contributions
to the management team. You have insights which are valuable
and of benefit to us all. In order to make the best decisions,
we must also hear from Peter and Maria. They have years of experience
and a great deal of expertise as well as a unique perspective
on the overall situation.
I am concerned that we are not
benefiting from their experience and may make some lopsided decisions.
In the future, I am going to ask you to refrain from talking
so much and I am going to ask them to participate more. I need
your cooperation on this."
Similarly, talk individually
with Peter and Maria, saying:
"You have an enormous amount
of experience and a unique point of view on many of the issues
we are facing. I'm concerned the management team isn't benefiting
from your experience and viewpoint. Therefore we aren't considering
everything we might as we come to decisions.
From now on in our meetings I
would like for us to hear more from you. I am going to ask our
more talkative members to limit their comments, giving us time
to hear other opinions. I'll ask for your input and would appreciate
your help in rounding out our knowledge base as we consider the
challenges ahead of us."
That was the easy part. The hard
part is to now enforce this strategy, in public if necessary.
If the more dominant members persist you will have to reign them
in, while at the same time activating the more passive members.
"Sakai, I appreciate your
comments. However right now we need to hear what Peter may think
about this proposal. Then I think we need to hear from Maria."
You will continually monitor, and manage the levels of participation
by your team members as they adapt to a new 'norm,' i.e. normal
way of interacting which is more effective. You must be willing
to stay the course.
It will be worth the effort.
The payoff will be decisions that tap into the collective wisdom
and experience of the group, and a more synergistic team. Additionally
your satisfaction, and the group's overall satisfaction, with
its work together will increase.
Don't forget
the basics.
Final thoughts: You didn't mention
how your meetings are structured, i.e. do you have an agenda?
Is it published well ahead of the meeting so that people may
prepare? Is a set amount of time allotted to various agenda items?
Do you publish minutes? Do you have agreed to ground rules?
The basic guidelines for conducting
effective meetings taught in management training ought not to
be just 'stuff' we then ignore. Those guidelines really work
and do produce better meetings.
If you'd like a copy of guidelines
for more effective meetings or suggested ground rules please
contact us and we'll send one to you.
Finally, the size of your management
team is also important. Typically in a group of eight to twelve
people you can expect to hear routinely from six to nine. As
the group becomes larger the number of people who will be vocal
normally decreases. In a group of twenty to thirty people typically
only four to eight will be vocal.
In closing let us restate what
we said was an initial guiding principle:
Actively manage the levels of
participation in your group. Do not focus only on the business
at hand and ignore managing and influencing the dynamics of your
group.
Back
to "Features" Menu |
