Excerpted from the L.E.T. book by Dr. Thomas Gordon
As would be expected, at some time leaders will come into conflict with all of their people. It may not happen often, but it does happen, particularly when all group members somehow fall into a pattern of doing something in concert that the leader finds unacceptable, as in the following situation described by a leadership training [L.E.T.] graduate of a large French computer company:
Each week, Michele, the project team coordinator, organizes a meeting on project follow-up that brings together the 15–18 project coordinators. The objective of these meetings is for the project coordinators to keep each other informed on the status of their projects so that their interface is optimum and so they avoid duplication of effort.
Michele was experiencing great difficulty in both getting people to come to the meetings and also giving their full attention to it. Some didn’t show up at all; others would arrive late or leave early after finishing their own report to the meeting. Michele realized she was losing 20% of her time pestering the participants before and after the meetings in addition to the frustration that she felt in seeing the lack of motivation of most of the participants during that important moment of teamwork.
During the L.E.T. course, she found herself in the same group with one of her project coordinators who was the worst offender (not always there, arriving late, leaving early). Taking advantage of the opportunity during a role-playing session, Michele proposed to work on their conflict in regard to the meetings. Thanks to Active Listening, Michele understood that the need of this project coordinator was to lose as little time as possible, and that the time taken to allow all of the team coordinators to speak—which took 2 to 3 hours—meant that he only had a few minutes to give his report.
As a result of this interaction, Michele realized that the meetings were only one possible solution to meet her need of having coherent and reciprocal information shared among the group. She also recognized that if there were a better situation, she would be open to it.
Consequently, Michele decided to dedicate the next meeting to finding a solution to this problem.
Michele: As you can see on the agenda, I have dedicated the first part of our meeting to a discussion on the functioning of our meetings. My need is to arrive at a solution that will satisfy all of us. I am frustrated because I am obliged to pester you regularly and run these meetings where I am counting on all of you, and where certain of you are not here for the whole time that this meeting is in session. Consequently, I lose precious time. It is essential for me that the coordination and information be reciprocally exchanged and be excellent. In addition, I am responsible for assuring the coherence between your different projects. I invite you to help me to understand what you don’t like in these meetings which could explain the lack of enthusiasm in your participation.
Project Coordinator 1: As I said in the L.E.T. course we did together, these meetings are a waste of time for me because 90% of what is said doesn’t concern me. I’m looking at my watch all the time and thinking to myself how much work I would be getting done if I didn’t have to be sitting here!
M: If you could obtain the same useful information exchange in much less time, you would be more motivated.
PC1: Yes! At the same time, I understand that we have to coordinate our efforts and work together in what we do individually since each one of us is in our own little sphere. But if the meetings could be overhauled to go faster, I would be very happy!
All the other project coordinators in spontaneous unison: We agree! We also are sometimes annoyed and want to see these meetings finish earlier!
M: OK, we agree that we would all be satisfied if we could find a way to work that would guarantee that all of us are informed, as well as the coordination and coherence of our activities, while taking less of our time, including mine.
Project Coordinators: Of course! Naturally! Yes!
M: Do you have any suggestions, any ideas?
Project Coordinator 2: If I had some information on what concerns me in writing, that would be perfectly convenient for me.
Project Coordinator 3: We could make a little note about each one of our sub-groups.
Project Coordinator 4: Yes, in place of this long meeting, each of us could write a report of about fifteen lines on what we have done each week and send it to all the rest by e-mail.
M: That seems interesting to me. Still, I would like us to continue to meet as a team on certain occasions, because without seeing each other the team spirit could be lost.
Finally, after more discussion, the group decision was:
1. To replace the weekly meeting with a half-page report each project coordinator would send by e-mail to all the others.
2. To maintain a meeting of three hours each month for important presentations, information exchange and discussions concerning the coherence and the complimentary factors of the work of the different project-teams.
After six months of working this way, the whole group considered the new method a success, in the sense that it produced the same results as the previous weekly meetings with an investment of half the time.
In addition, they all observed that they now had a real pleasure in getting together in their monthly meetings and that informal and friendly relationships had developed as a consequence, reinforcing the team spirit.
Because the team project coordinator regarded the meeting as a problem, it was up to her to take the initiative to get her team together, confront them with her concerns, and start the problem-solving process. It became clear that everyone was frustrated by the meetings, and that these meetings were only one solution to the need for information-sharing and coordination of the team efforts. That set the stage for finding a mutually acceptable solution which was far superior to the previous one.