|
getting timely responses; Kate dis-
<br />agrees. In such situations, each per-
<br />son tries to convince the other that
<br />he or she is wrong. Diane will offer
<br />evidence for her own position; Kate
<br />will do the same. They're likely to
<br />doubt each other's evidence; neither
<br />will offer data to weaken her own
<br />position. In the end, the "loser" is
<br />still likely to believe she is right.
<br />Instead, Diane and Kate together
<br />could design a way of testing their
<br />disagreement. Once they realize that
<br />they disagree, they could determine
<br />whether they at least concur on the
<br />meaning of "timely responses." One
<br />of them could suggest that they work
<br />together to determine the true situa-
<br />tion. Each would have to be willing
<br />to accept the possibility that her
<br />information might be inaccurate or
<br />incomplete.
<br />Then they together could develop
<br />a method to determine which facts
<br />are relevant. They'd have to agree on
<br />whom to interview, what questions
<br />to ask, what statistical data are rele-
<br />vant, and how to collect data. They
<br />might decide to speak with several
<br />employees and some recent tele-
<br />phone customers. They also could
<br />review an agreed -upon number of
<br />written complaints. They might
<br />decide to work together to interview
<br />people, so that they both hear the
<br />same conversations at the same time.
<br />Whatever methods they use, it's
<br />critical that both Kate and Diane
<br />agree to them. They also should
<br />agree to use the data resulting from
<br />their methods. Once they collect the
<br />information, they should discuss it
<br />together and reach a decision about
<br />the desired speed of response to cus-
<br />tomers:
<br />Two important questions people
<br />should ask when they're testing dis-
<br />agreements jointly are "How could
<br />we both be correct ?" and "How
<br />could we each see the same problem
<br />differently ?" People in groups often
<br />are working with different facts.
<br />Group members come from various
<br />areas in the organization and may be
<br />talking about different times, places,
<br />and people. Both Diane's and Kate's
<br />information could be correct, just
<br />incomplete. Some units may be
<br />responding to calls from customers
<br />in a timely manner, while others
<br />aren't.
<br />If they can agree to test and
<br />resolve their disagreements jointly,
<br />group members are more likely to be
<br />internally committed to the outcome.
<br />Discuss " nondiscussable" issues.
<br />Most groups have "nondiscussable"
<br />issues that are relevant to their
<br />tasks — issues that group members
<br />believe they cannot discuss without
<br />negative consequences. Such issues
<br />may include the poor performance
<br />df some group members, distrust
<br />befween.sbme members, and the
<br />reluctance of some members to dis-
<br />agree with their superiors in the
<br />group.
<br />Such issues —which may be criti-
<br />cal for the group to resolve —often
<br />raise feelings of mistrust, inadequacy,
<br />and defensiveness. Consequently,
<br />group members may avoid dis-
<br />cussing them. Or, they may talk
<br />about them outside the group with
<br />people they do trust. As long as cru-
<br />cial issues remain taboo in group
<br />discussions, the group's performance
<br />is likely to suffer.
<br />Group members need to open up
<br />forbidden topics in order to share
<br />valid information and make free,
<br />informed choices. One way to
<br />broach sensitive subjects is to raise
<br />them and acknowledge that they
<br />may be considered off - limits. For
<br />example, "I realize that what I'm
<br />about to say may be considered
<br />nondiscussable. But I think we can
<br />be more effective if we deal with this
<br />issue."
<br />Group members also can explore
<br />their concerns about certain issues
<br />without actually discussing them.
<br />Someone can say, "I want to raise an
<br />important issue, but I'm concerned
<br />about reprisals. I want to talk about
<br />that before I decide whether to iden-
<br />tify the issue." Once people's fears
<br />are allayed, they're usually more
<br />willing to talk openly. And once a
<br />group talks about one hidden issue,
<br />it's likely to find it easier to deal with
<br />others.
<br />Keep discussions focused. Group
<br />members should discuss relevant
<br />issues, focus. on the same issues, and
<br />fully understand the issues.
<br />A group can spend too much time
<br />discussing matters that are irrelevant
<br />to its task. To refocus, it helps to
<br />identify exactly how the group
<br />veered off the track. For example,
<br />50 Training & Development, August 1994
<br />"We began the discussion by talking
<br />about work loads, and now we're
<br />talking about photocopiers. I think
<br />we've gotten off the track. Do others
<br />agree ?"
<br />To get everyone to address the
<br />same issue, it helps to identify the
<br />various issues that have been raised.
<br />For example, "I think we're talking
<br />about different things. It sounds as if
<br />Maria and Debra are talking about
<br />coordinating different schedules,
<br />while Nancy and Jamal are talking
<br />about the amount of work we can
<br />accomplish. Do others agree that
<br />we're talking about different things ?"
<br />If other people do agree, it's recom-
<br />mended to ask which topic would
<br />be best to talk about first.
<br />It's especially important that
<br />everyone focus on the same issue
<br />when a group is defining a problem
<br />it will tackle. If some members think
<br />they're trying to solve different prob-
<br />lems, the group isn't likely to accom-
<br />plish its task.
<br />To stay focused, a group must dis-
<br />cuss an issue until all members
<br />understand it. That way, they all
<br />have the same information on which
<br />to base informed choices. If even
<br />one person doesn't understand an
<br />issue, the group needs to discuss it
<br />until it's clear to everyone.
<br />Eliminate cheap shots and other dis-
<br />tractions. Almost everyone in a
<br />group has been the target of a cheap
<br />shot at some time. No matter how
<br />witty, snide remarks tend to make
<br />people feel bad and harm group
<br />interaction.
<br />In group meetings, people who
<br />have been insulted tend to feel
<br />angry. They spend time trying to fig-
<br />ure out the reasons for the insult and
<br />contemplating clever comebacks. In
<br />other words, they become distracted
<br />from the task at hand. Distracted
<br />people can't fully participate in
<br />group discussions. And they cannot
<br />concentrate on identifying and solv-
<br />ing problems. As a result, they may
<br />withhold their consent to group deci-
<br />sions.
<br />People shouldn't engage in any
<br />behavior that distracts the group
<br />from its task. That includes cheap
<br />shots, side conversations, and private
<br />jokes.
<br />All group members are expected to
<br />participate in all phases of the
<br />
|