A team spends an hour discussing a decision. Before that decision moves into action, I want to know: whose understanding of the work actually made it into the conversation?
That question stayed with me this week as I read MatrixWorks: A Life Affirming Guide to Facilitation Mastery and Group Genius.
The authors describe different ways of tracking what happens in a group: nonverbal communication, power dynamics, who speaks, who stays silent, and how people group themselves.
There was so much to consider that I started imagining reviewing a recording with cofacilitators, making several passes and looking for something different each time. Recording was my own thought, prompted by the reading. I wanted a way to study what I might miss in the moment.
It left me thinking about the attention we give a room while we are responsible for leading it.
The conversation beneath the agenda
When I am preparing my next question or thinking about time, how much attention do I have left for the person who started to speak and then stopped?
What about the person everyone looks toward before offering an opinion?
Those observations would give me something to investigate. I would still need to ask questions before deciding what they meant. Silence alone would not tell me whether someone agreed, needed more time, or had something they were unsure how to say.
For a leader responsible for a decision, this raises a practical concern: what information do we still need before we commit people, time, and money?
I would want to ask that before discovering an unanswered question during implementation.
And I would want the person carrying that question to have a meaningful opportunity to contribute it.
Try noticing one pattern
At your next meeting, choose one thing to observe: participation.
If possible, ask a colleague to notice alongside you so you can compare observations afterward.
Pay attention to whose perspectives you hear and how people get an opening to speak. Before closing the discussion, try asking:
“Whose experience have we not heard from yet that could help us make this decision?”
Give people time to think. You might invite everyone to write briefly before opening the conversation, with the option to contribute in writing afterward. The invitation should create an opening without putting someone on the spot.
Then consider what you learned. Did another perspective change the plan, expose an assumption, or clarify a next step?
If it did, tell people how their contribution affected the work. That is the kind of follow-through I would want if someone asked for my perspective.
What I am learning
I recognize connections here to my xchange Guide training, including the attention given to group energy and the willingness to invite movement or change an activity.
This reading has me thinking more carefully about what informs those choices. If I notice a lull, what do I need to understand before deciding how to respond?
I want to bring that same curiosity to participation. Before I conclude that someone has nothing to add, I want to examine whether the conversation has given them a workable way to enter.
I care about creating spaces where people can contribute without having to fight for an opening. I also want those conversations to help people make decisions they understand and can act on.
In your next important meeting, whose perspective would you want to hear before moving forward?
The Creative Leader’s Edge explores how we lead, create, and work together, drawing on what I am studying, practicing, and questioning.
My coaching and facilitation work brings that curiosity to creative leaders and teams. If you are planning a leadership off-site or working through a decision that needs perspectives from across your organization, connect with me here on LinkedIn. Let’s talk about what you need the conversation to accomplish.