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
With gratitude to the pizza crew at Consultants' Camp 2003 and especially to Pat Sciacca and Nynke Fokma.
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? Send 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
- Ten Tactics for Tough Times: Part I
- When you find yourself in a tough spot politically, what can you do? Most of us obsess about the situation for a while, and then if we still have time to act, we do what seems best. Here's Part I of a set of approaches that can organize your thinking and shorten the obsessing.
- The Advantages of Political Attack: Part II
- In workplace politics, attackers are often surprisingly successful with even the flimsiest assertions. Often, they prevail, in part, because they can choose the time and venue for their attacks. They also have the advantage of preparation. How can targets respond effectively?
- Extrasensory Deception: Part I
- Negotiation skills are increasingly essential in problem-solving workplaces. When incentives are strong, or pressure is high, deception is tempting. Here are some of the deceptions popular among negotiators.
- Extrasensory Deception: Part II
- In negotiating agreements, the partners who do the drafting have an ethical obligation not to exploit the advantages of the drafting role. Some drafters don't meet that standard.
- Failure Foreordained
- Performance Improvement Plans help supervisors guide their subordinates toward improved performance. But they can also be used to develop documentation to support termination. How can subordinates tell whether a PIP is a real opportunity to improve?
See also Workplace Politics, Effective Meetings and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates.
Contact Rick for details at rbrenner@ChacoCanyon.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
- The Race to the South Pole: Lessons in Risk Management for Leaders
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough. But to organizational leaders and project managers, the story is fascinating. We'll use the history of this event to explore lessons in risk management and its application to organizational efforts. A fascinating and refreshing look at risk management from the vantage point of history. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- Cognitive Biases and Workplace Decision-Making
- For most of us, making decisions is a large part of what we do at work. And we tend to believe that we make our decisions rationally, except possibly when stressed or hurried. That is a mistaken belief — very few of our decisions are purely rational. In this eye-opening yet entertaining program, Rick Brenner guides you through the fascinating world of cognitive biases, and he'll give concrete tips to help you control the influence of cognitive biases. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- MITRE, in Bedford, MA: October 21, Monthly Meeting, Boston SPIN.
- The Race to the South Pole: Ten Lessons for Project Managers
- On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough, but to project managers, the story is fascinating. Lessons abound. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- The Politics of Meetings for People Who Hate Politics
- There's a lot more to running an effective meeting than having the right room, the right equipment, and the right people. With meetings, the whole really is more than the sum of its parts. How the parts interact with each other and with external elements is as important as the parts themselves. And those interactions are the essence of politics for meetings. This program explores techniques for leading meetings that are based on understanding political interactions, and using that knowledge effectively to meet organizational goals. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program: