Hijacked!
I work with many school leaders. These leaders tend to be open-minded, consensus-oriented people and the schools they lead believe in the benefit of creating forums for discussion with and among employees. The idea that open discussion will nurture an engaged group of workers is a good one, especially during current times when employment engagement is at an all-time low. Freedom to ask questions of others, especially those who supervise programs and departments, in a group setting, encourages trust, develops leaders and allows group process that generates ideas that in turn can solve problems. Arguably, the existence of a place to speak up, to use your voice to improve the place you work, is vital to a successful organization of any kind.
At the end of this past school year, however, many of the seasoned managers that I work with described their frustration at open discussion sessions. They described sessions that became way-laid by people who spoke too much, by others who raised pet problems again and again, by some who constantly spoke over their colleagues and by many who constantly brought relatively trivial, lower-order questions to these meetings. All these leaders were struggling with the same issues: How do I create open discussion sessions where more people feel engaged and fulfilled in the time they spend together? How do I manage the amount of seemingly unimportant questions that come my way? How might I encourage group or individual problem-solving rather than simply problem-sharing? Is it enough to bring people together or are we missing opportunities to do this better?
Digging down into these questions, there seems to be a core or generative question we might consider: If you believe that open or informal discussions can offer opportunities for employee engagement and building a positive organizational culture, how best can you structure those meetings and what will it require from you or others to facilitate them well?
First, if you want to establish, nurture and develop a workplace that values openness and candor, then ensuring that there are opportunities, both informal and formal, for input and feedback on how things are going is good practice. As a leader you need diversity of thought coming your way. Equally, it makes sense for you to accept that you are not always right and to encourage comments and questions will help shape your organizational culture—your own transparency and openness to dialog can help make this happen.
Secondly, you might want to consider what kinds of structures will work for you and your organization. One-size rarely fits all: a mix of formal and informal opportunities, varying the size and composition of groups, sometimes having a clear goal and other times an open-ended session will benefit different styles and achieve different outcomes. Always consider your broad organizational goals for these sessions first. Are you providing a space for anyone to say anything—-why? Are you encouraging creative and open thought that benefits your institutional goals—are you picking the right format? Do you simply want to model transparency—yours? Your senior team’s?
One broad format that I found successful in my time as head of school was Open Space Technology. Writing about OPT (see link), Michael Herman enticingly says: “Open Space works best when the work to be done is complex, the people and ideas involved are diverse, the passion for resolution (and potential for conflict) are high, and the time to get it done was yesterday.” The major upside of this approach is the opportunity for employees to voice a topic that they want to discuss and see how many others might want that too. The principle of OST, “Whoever comes are the right people,” is important, and helps all staff understand whether or not this might be a key issue. The possible downside is that it relies on the people in the discussion groups to decide on next steps—what to do next is not baked-in to the process. Ideally, we held these discussions once a month; I encouraged the groups to follow up with whomever seemed the right person post-discussion. This meant that existing structures and lines of communication were being utilized.
Defining and holding to the value of openness in small group meetings within your workplace culture, whether it be existing working groups, ad hoc settings, or one-on-one meetings, is vital to encouraging employee engagement and building a culture of fulfillment. In short, it will simply make the workplace better. For leaders to ensure this happens throughout the organization is not easy, and it certainly can cause frustration, but again, it will prove to be valuable. If all the people with power and influence within your workplace can help establish and nurture open dialog and exchange, the organization will benefit greatly.
I began these Words of Wisdom from a position of pain—responding to leaders who have encouraged open dialog and then felt helpless and hijacked when the conversations seemed to fail or at least flounder. People rapidly went down rabbit holes, there was rambling, colleagues talked over each other and no one heard or could speak easily. As SmarterWisdom frequently advises: always go back to your initial hopes and goals for the structures you put in place. Redefine what you want—and get input and feedback from others. Reflect on how it’s going—and make adjustments. Create structures that seem to work. Hold people accountable to the goals you agree on. Constantly ask the questions: Is this working? How can we make it better? And, don’t give up empowering people to be their best selves; this will never stop being worthwhile!
Resources used :
https://www.forbes.com/sites/toriutley/2017/04/30/the-importance-of-open-dialogue-with-your-team/
https://www.tenthousandcoffees.com/blog/10-ways-to-have-better-conversations
https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/leadership/group-facilitation/group-discussions/main
https://www.retrium.com/ultimate-guide-to-agile-retrospectives/facilitating-open-discussion