Impasses in Group Decision-Making:
by Rick Brenner
Some impasses that develop in group decision-making relate to the substance of the discussion. Some are not substantive, but still present serious obstacles. What can we do about nonsubstantive impasses?
Dry Falls, in Grand County, Washington State. Dry Falls was once one of the greatest waterfalls in Earth's geological history. It was formed after the latest glaciation, about 10,000 to 20,000 years ago, when the melting glaciers created a large lake in western Montana. The glacier formed an ice dam containing the lake, but as the lake grew it eventually broke through the dam, and the suddenly outrushing waters formed what is now Dry Falls. When the falls were active, they were 3.5 miles (5.6 km) wide with a vertical drop of 400 feet (122 m). Compare this to Niagara, at about one mile (1.6 km) by 165 feet (50 m). Western and central Washington state were scoured by this catastrophic flood. The affected area is today known as "scablands."
The harm done by impasses transcends the relationships of the people involved, or the project they're working on. When the impasse finally breaks, people tend to rush around trying to make up for lost time. The work they do is hurried, and probably not of the best quality. The defects that are introduced this way aren't always evident immediately, but like the geological scars of the scablands, they can be long-lasting.
Photo by Jeff Axel courtesy U.S. National Park Service.
Last time we began examining nonsubstantive impasses that arise from hostage-taking, coercion, and confidential commitments. We now continue our exploration.
- Digging in
- At times, people can become "dug in" — so publicly committed to their positions that they're unwilling to alter them for fear of humiliation. Their fears might or might not be realistic.
- You can avoid this yourself by keeping an open mind, or at least, keeping your own counsel. To help others alter their own strongly held positions, propose a halt in debate, resuming only after everyone has agreed to temporarily advocate a position that is both opposed to their own, and already occupied by someone else. This exercise sometimes gives people the insights and freedom they need to modify their positions.
- Currying favor
- Some advocates have made no commitment to anyone else, but instead advocate positions favored by particularly powerful individuals, hoping to accumulate recognition and credit. They haven't secured an agreement for a quid pro quo; they're speculating.
- Persuading these people of the merits of the issue is unlikely to succeed. They follow the object of their attentions as long as they feel there's a chance of success. To convert them, find ways to persuade them that their strategy is unworkable, or that they're mistaken about the views of the people with whom they've aligned themselves.
- Some dissenters seek nothing in terms of the issues at hand, or any other issues, for that matter. Their goal is to prevent the group from reaching decisions of any kind. Perhaps they recognize that anything this group might decide would be inimical to their own goals; or they might want to demonstrate the fecklessness of the group's leadership team.
- Their objectives can be varied, but generally, they want to halt all forward progress. Debating the issues with saboteurs is futile from the perspective of finding a solution, but debate can be useful if it can draw the saboteurs into revealing that sabotage is their goal.
- Dissenters who The harm done by impasses transcends
the relationships of the people
involved, or the project
they're working onfeel that they've been badly treated in the past by this group, or by some members of this group, might seek revenge by blocking forward progress. Here too, the issues are not the issues; rather the issue is the hurt or perceived hurt from some past experience.
- Addressing the impasse in this case is likely to be productive only if both parties acknowledge the past hurt. This can be difficult, because most hurts are more symmetric than either party can acknowledge. Even so, acknowledgment is the place to begin. Privacy and discretion are required. Sometimes, acknowledgement isn't possible for one party or the other.
Impasses are expensive. An impasse prevents a decision on the immediate issue, and the delays that follow can delay anything that depends on that decision. If you're determined to block progress, be certain that you appreciate all the consequences. First in this series 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? rbrenKJQpzqapYThylwzQner@ChactLvZUTOCUpiJWWVcoCanyon.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 Conflict Management:
- Practice Positive Politics
- Politics is a dirty word at work, as elsewhere. We think of it as purely destructive, often distorting decisions and leading the organization in wrong directions. And sometimes, it does. Politics can be constructive, though, and you can help to make it so.
- Stonewalling: Part I
- Stonewalling is a tactic of obstruction used by those who wish to stall the forward progress of some effort. Whether the effort is a rival project, an investigation, or just the work of a colleague, the stonewaller hopes to gain advantage. What can you do about stonewalling?
- Logically Illogical
- Discussions in meetings and in written media can get long and complex. When a chain of reasoning gets long enough, we sometimes make fundamental errors of logic, especially when we're under time pressure. Here are just a few.
- New Ideas: Judging
- When groups work together to solve problems, they eventually evaluate the ideas they generate. They sometimes reject perfectly good ideas, while accepting some really boneheaded ones. How can we judge new ideas more effectively?
- Compulsive Talkers at Work: Addiction
- Incessant, unending talking about things that the listener doesn't care about, already knows about, or can do nothing about is an irritating behavior that harms both talker and listener. What can we do about this?
See also Conflict Management and Workplace Politics for more related articles.
Forthcoming Issues of Point Lookout
- Coming February 17: Conversation Despots
- Some people insist that conversations reach their personally favored conclusions, no matter what others want. Here are some of their tactics. Available here and by RSS on February 17.
- And on February 24: Allocating Airtime: Part I
- The problem of people who dominate meetings is so serious that we've even devised processes intended to more fairly allocate speaking time. What's happening here? Available here and by RSS on February 24.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates.
Contact Rick for details at rbrenpNordmQZwEBaVOZoner@ChacwzWMPWjaBjdbbjkKoCanyon.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
- High-Voltage Brainstorming: Leading Teams to More Brilliant Ideas Faster
- Although most of us are very familiar with a technique known as brainstorming, many overestimate its effectiveness. Serious research indicates that, as commonly practiced, brainstorming produces results that tend to overlook some brilliant ideas, and might even include ideas that actually have little promise. In this eye opening yet entertaining program, Rick Brenner guides us as we explore the sources of the deficiencies of brainstorming, and then suggests concrete tips for mitigating those deficiencies.
Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:
- 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: