| Several years ago,
while I was chairing a meeting, I heard noise on my left hand side,
which I thought was a side conversation. In my usual zeal to ensure
a “picture-perfect meeting,” I turned towards the two individuals
and said: “Can we please have one meeting at a time?”
As a result, I got what I was looking for: complete silence... eerie
silence. The non-verbal feedback from all participants was chilling,
but no one said anything.
Shortly thereafter I called a break. It was then that one of the individuals
who was “side talking” approached me and said: “What
you did to us was rude and insensitive.” I was taken aback
by the statement and asked him why. He continued: “The person
sitting next to me is physically handicapped and was experiencing some
discomfort. I was trying to help him out, while keeping the noise level
as low as I could. You did not even bother to check what the problem
was when you scolded us in front of our colleagues.”
I then understood the eerie silence that followed my intervention.
I thanked the individual for sharing the feedback and profusely apologized
to him and to the group for what I did. Yes, my intervention was done
in good faith and without malice, but it was embarrassing and hurtful.
An appropriate response to the “side talk” would have been:
“Do you need any help?”
The lesson? Before you leap in, “guns blazing,” to solve
a perceived problem at a meeting (or elsewhere), you may want to first
ascertain what “the problem” is. If you don’t, the
measure you take may end up not solving “the problem,” and
may also produce undesirable side effects.
Another lesson? Open the communications channels and make it easy for
others to share feedback with you. In my case, I had made it very clear
to the group that I welcomed their feedback on how I ran the meeting.
Had I not done that, the individual might not have bothered to give
me the feedback. I would not have been able to minimize the damage,
nor would I have been able to learn from my mistake.
|
