Successful conversations: the benefit of gathering viewpoints early
In my previous blog we explored some of the communication challenges that happen when those crucial workplace conversations take place and how we can make the most of those meaningful exchanges of thoughts, opinions and information. In this piece, I go deeper on the timing and setting for facilitating important discussions and explore why the handling of this process is critical.
A while back, I facilitated a strategic workshop for a regional management group here in Asia. Their industry was rapidly changing, regional nuisances existed and they needed to find refreshed ways to strengthen their competitive advantage while also engaging and re-energising the group.
Prior to the workshop, one-on-one interviews were conducted (this is a common approach to gathering feedback during my facilitation sessions). A set of questions was asked of everyone and each participant was told their comments would be treated anonymously. These questions were designed to support the process set out for the workshop day; a process designed to ensure the correct conversations were had with all involved.
To one question (about their fears), one member of staff shared the following comment:
“I don’t sleep well at night. I worry a lot. I worry about the business, our talent, and how the office is doing. I fear when the bubble will burst – given we have been performing really well. What will happen? Pressure is on me and the team.”
At the point in the workshop when everyone’s comments to the same question were shared, I heard someone say, “I don’t agree with this one”! And then I heard someone else say “…but if it’s here, someone in this room has said it, so it must be true …”
This started an important conversation which birthed the sharing of additional, more honest feelings and views (around this question and other issues) and, in turn, guided some initiatives and decisions. Note also the immediate response of “I don’t agree” – to the person’s vulnerable sharing about not being able to sleep at night due to worrying about the team. Had this conversation taken place without the anonymity, imagine the lack of compassion and empathy that they might have felt!
The initiatives and discussions that came out of the whole session would not have happened if that one person in the room didn’t feel safe enough to share that viewpoint or had kept quiet as they potentially devalued their own view. The process, also, supported this initial step. And curiously, by the end of this workshop, many felt safer than before – particularly when they saw how open many were to hearing this concern (including those in management).
For me, this reinforces the value of getting everyone’s voice into the room around certain, collectively important issues. This is the benefit of gathering everyone’s viewpoint to kickstart such conversations.
The supporting process is important
When we consider gathering viewpoints in order to support and kickstart a conversation, it is important the process is clear and enabling. This collection process is one thing, and then the beginning of the response, is another. In my story before, the initial responses were critical in enabling the subsequent conversation. In some cases, leaders may need to step in and set the tone of the response.
Here are 7 process guidelines for collecting viewpoints:
- Well crafted questions that are simple, open and directed at the issue rather than at the character and identity of people provide safety around relationships. Using words like “What” to start your questions is great. “Tell me about ….” as you invite them in to share their thoughts. “How might we ….?” is another good starter to a question.
- Provide the focus, the context. If I had asked “What are your fears?” as opposed to “What are your fears about the regional business?”, I would have got a vague and potentially unrelated answer.
- Encourage people to respond using sentences. The use of verbs and descriptive words help tremendously. Single word answers or very short phases are not helpful. If my participant had answered with only – My fear is that “…the bubble will burst”, we all would have been left wondering, and yet the complete statement above provides so much information and insight. I’m sure we have all been in those meetings where the problems articulated around various challenges include comments like “we need more communication”, “we need a plan” etc. Technically, these are sentences, but they lack useful insight and information.
- Ensure everyone contributes their initial viewpoints without hearing those of others. As soon as the first person speaks in response to questions designed to gather viewpoints, everyone thereafter will start amending their original thoughts. The dynamic of the group as well as the influence of those perceived to “know” is very real and can reduce significantly the breath and depth of viewpoints offered.
- Solicit differing perspectives from different groups (and stakeholders). We often need to look up and out around our collective challenges. Differing perspectives can be incredibly useful. In our case above, when we looked at the comments from senior management and various supporting functions and then compared to the range within the regional group, a much fuller picture emerged. Senior management were concerned about the regional group while a supporting function did not realise how vulnerable the regional group felt. This made the whole pursuing conversation very rich, honest and even constructively vulnerable.
- Start with providing anonymity. Starting here is the best way to get everyone’s voice into the conversation. As people start feeling safer, they will be more prepared to add their name to their comments, but go with the group and don’t leave some more vulnerable than the confident others. Senior people should lead first by standing by their input.
- Transparency embodies trust. So, sharing everyone’s input can be great for trust building and subsequent conversations. If it is “overly managed”, people will remain suspicious. Yes, some courage is needed by the leaders who lead these processes, and it is in their response to all input that will make or break any subsequent conversations. Where necessary, do get facilitation support to help.
Here are some guidelines around responding to everyone’s input/viewpoints:
- Give people time to read and digest. Let them discuss it with their chosen colleagues, if necessary. People need time to make sense of new data.
- Do not diminish, discount or magnify any viewpoints. Listen to all comments, and if anything, be curious about it.
- Build on the context defined above and define the “bucket” or “container” for the conversation. For our example above, the regional group had a very clear objective:
“To explore how we might – together (regionally, each office) and individually – lift our performance for 20xx in a strategic, doable and sustainable way.”
- Continue to build on the context by answering these questions:
- Who has agency together to make changes (at the table)?
- Who may be impacted by these changes (stakeholders whose views may matter, be helpful and/or in some cases be critical)?
- Where are the boundaries? These may include things like very real constraints, realities of the environment, guiding principles around strategy or even values which need to be embraced, to name a few. These are best articulated and made clear.
- Give space for the conversation that emerges. Having a robust process will help ensure that all these inputs and subsequent conversations will serve the issue at hand.
One of my favourite, simple processes is this:
- What (are our realities and what patterns are we seeing, etc.)?,
- So What (is important after we have made sense of everything)?, and
- Now What (can we do together and individually, what is doable?).
The key here is not to rush each stage. We need to resist our tendency to rush to action. The process is important and provides the spaces for important conversations.
- Create a shared and collective space by speaking about the shared problem, shared concern, the collective need, the shared working relationships, for example. Speak using the collective and the word “we”. Ask “how might we…..?”
- Embrace the AND. We live with polarities – like how teams need to be both task and relationship focused. Don’t get trapped in the “EITHER…OR” conversation and those that result in people being polarised. Voting can do this. So explore and try and find the story that holds the “AND”. We want to find common ground and a shared future.
- Respond with “YES, AND ….” rather than “NO, BUT ….”
Collective conversations can be very empowering for a group of people, or a team to embrace. Collecting viewpoints early is a way to get everyone’s voice into the conversation. It’s also the way we surface good ideas, insights, possibilities, problems and issues in order to have the conversations we really need to have in our workplaces. Paying attention to good processes can help this all be more effective and safe.
As a leader hosting these larger conversations, what attributes of yours have helped you, and what might you need to strengthen? What has gone well in the past for you, and what do you worry about? I’d love to hear your thoughts around this.
In my next blog, specific examples of a range of important conversations will be shared, ones that benefit also from the collecting of viewpoints.
Dr Robyn Wilson focuses on helping leaders tackle the change and challenges they face and journeys with them as they, their teams and organizations navigate these with the aim of becoming stronger, gaining more clarity and with strengthened relationships and personal capability. She is the founder of Praxis Management Consulting.
No Comments