According to our news media, it seems that any topic or circumstance about which at least two people have different points of view is a CONTROVERSY!
Unfortunately, framing legitimate questions and alternative points of view as controversial is having a chilling effect on our willingness to ask good and important questions. It’s gotten to the point where we don’t express differing opinions for fear of getting caught in the crossfire of what might be an ugly, if not defamatory, altercation. In organizations, we too often choose to defer to others, fail to ask clarifying questions, and otherwise let things pass to avoid making waves. The outcomes we enable through our silence can be – at best – less effective or efficient than they could be; and – at worst – they can be calamitous.
Organizational leaders need to step up to the opportunity to move beyond climates of false agreement and create environments in which constructive questioning and testing is not only acceptable, but encouraged. Failure to do so will lead to truly bad outcomes.
The good news is: the gap that exists between a closed and an open organization (the willingness of your colleagues to collaborate toward better outcomes) is far from insurmountable and probably not even that great. Based on a lot of client experience and organizational research, here are some primary points of reference and suggested actions you can take to get on a more productive path:
• Tell ‘em what you want—If you want a more open organization or team, let your people know. Given them permission to ask questions and to critically assess ideas to ensure the best or intended outcomes.
• Practice what you preach—When presenting an idea of your own, encourage the behavior you want by inviting questions. (How effectively does this approach drive the result that we want?) Ask people to critically assess your thoughts. (What might be a better way to do this?) When facilitating a conversation about someone else’s ideas, model the behavior by doing these things yourself – respectfully and in moderation. Reinforce this behavior in others by noting it and, as appropriate, pointing out how questions have confirmed a direction, or helped discover a better one. Establish ground rules about whether silence equals agreement, or if active agreement is required to move on. Either way, ensure that everyone participates.
• Clear eyes, full hearts can’t lose—As we learned from Coach Taylor in the TV version of Friday Night Lights, commitment coupled with passion can take us to great places when we “play” as a team. By setting the expectation of internal constructive-analysis and critique; we open the door to the possibility of unleashing the power of many. We need to build and support the discipline through modeling behavior and encouraging and better enabling others to practice it. Our process should allow for discussion and adjustment, and it needs to define when that period ends and we stand in agreement that we outwardly share with conviction to the world.
Your selection process should be mapped out and ready to roll - including: those scripted questions, an assessment instrument aligned with our required profile, a timeline, templates for job-related tests or scenarios, realistic job previews, emails, offer letters, and onboarding. All this and more prepares you to move quickly and well. This preparation also removes ignorance as a pitfall or excuse.
We might understand the imperative of thoughtful debate through the lens of more formal models like Groupthink or the Abilene Paradox, even through metaphors like being called Lemmings. It doesn’t matter, as long as we do it. More importantly, we need to be aware that understanding must lead us to action. We need to move to counteract negative group and decision dynamics through approaches like the one outlined above. Sanction it, bring it into practice, and reinforce it through praise and then through examples of its impact.
Controversial? Smart!
