by Rick Brenner
When we offer a contribution to a discussion, and everyone ignores it and moves on, we sometimes feel that our contribution has "plopped." We feel devalued. Rarely is this interpretation correct. What is going on?
There, it happened again. Maureen was certain, now, that she wasn't really part of this team. Every time she offered her perspective on anything, they would listen politely and then continue on as if she had said nothing. Everything she said landed with a plop, so she decided to just sit quietly and endure.
Plopping is a dangerous practice. When we plop the contributions of others, we risk alienating them, and we risk losing access to whatever they do have of value.
A reasonable model of most group discussion is a series of sequential contributions, possibly overlapping in time or concept. When we make a contribution, we feel validated when it's acknowledged in some way, positively or negatively. Approving comments, extensions, expressions of disagreement, differences of opinion, counterexamples, and even disparaging remarks carry various degrees of validation. Even negative acknowledgments let us know that people did listen.
Plopping is a
dangerous practice —
we alienate the
people we plopSometimes a contribution is ignored completely — it plops. No following contributions refer to it; the group is utterly silent with respect to it. When this happens, we can feel rejected and frustrated because we have a seat at the table, but nothing more.
When our contributions plop, we tend to make a meaning about the plop that threatens our self-esteem. Although plopping a colleague's comment can be a deliberate act of rudeness, it can also be a result of failing to understand, or inattention, or confusion, or even distraction. Plopping has so many causes that it's difficult to conclude that insult was the motivation.
What can you do about plopping?
- Connect your comments to the comments of others
- Start your comment with "I agree with what Jen says, and I'd extend it a bit…" If we all did this, there would be no plopping at all, and the discussion would be more coherent.
- Be aware of biases
- Perhaps you've formed an opinion about someone on the basis of past performance, gender, past ill feelings, or other factors unrelated to the discussion content. Since biases can predispose us to plopping, awareness of our biases helps us avoid it.
- Don't try to unplop your own comments
- When one of our comments plops, some of us try to force the conversation back to it, to unplop it. This rarely works. The more you do this, the more irritated the group becomes.
- Offer related contributions
- Unrelated contributions are plop bait. Unless your comment is clearly relevant to the discussion, some people tend to see it as an attempt to score by redirecting the discussion. The more competitive people in the group might even intentionally plop your contribution. Sometimes, they'll even cut off those who try to build on it.
I'd like to hear your plop stories, of course, but if you don't write to me that's OK. I won't feel plopped. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrengktbCppeDewXlcxtner@ChacbgQhkZXWXJTeoEWCoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email
, or by Web form
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful,
and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive
of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout,
as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in,
anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Is It Blame or Is It Accountability?
- When we seek those accountable for a particular failure, we risk blaming them instead, because many of us confuse accountability with blame. What's the difference between them? How can we keep blame at bay?
- Nasty Questions: Part I
- Some of the questions we ask each other aren't intended to elicit information from the respondent. Rather, they're poorly disguised attacks intended to harm the respondent politically, and advance the questioner's political agenda. Here's part one a catalog of some favorite tactics.
- Worst Practices
- We hear a lot about best practices, but hardly anybody talks about worst practices. So as a public service, here are some of the best worst practices.
- More Limitations of the Eisenhower Matrix
- The Eisenhower Matrix is useful for distinguishing which tasks deserve attention and in what order. It helps us by removing perceptual distortion about what matters most. But it can't help as much with some kinds of perceptual distortion.
- How to Deal with Holding Back
- When group members voluntarily restrict their contributions to group efforts, group success is threatened and high performance becomes impossible. How can we reduce the incidence of holding back?
See also Workplace Politics, Effective Meetings and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 4: Just-In-Time Hoop-Jumping
- Securing approvals for projects, proposals, or other efforts is often called "jumping through hoops." Hoop-jumping can be time-consuming and frustrating. Here are some suggestions for jumping through hoops efficiently. Available here and by RSS on May 4.
- And on May 11: Characterization Risk
- To characterize is to offer a description of a person, event, or concept. Characterizations are usually judgmental, and usually serve one side of a debate. And they often make trouble. Available here and by RSS on May 11.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates.
Contact Rick for details at rbrenLAlLyFAgapVuGaiYner@ChaclWpZQkxycORyLacLoCanyon.com
or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
Reprinting this article
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline?
Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- Managing in Fluid Environments
- Most people now work in environments that can best be characterized as fluid, because they're subject to continual change. We never know whats coming next. In such environments, managing — teams, projects, groups, departments, or the enterprise — often entails moving from surprise to surprise while somehow staying almost on track. It's a nerve-wracking existence. This program provides numerous tools that help managers who work in fluid environments. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program: