You had a 1-1 meeting with your boss earlier in the day about the implementation of a new software program your team is responsible for implementing and the timeline is at risk. Your boss told you what she thought you should do and while you think there are far better options than what your boss is suggesting, you didn’t say anything and simply agreed to do it her way.
After that meeting, you met with your project manager, trying to get an understanding of what the challenges on this project have been. His answers were brief and he seemed guarded, making it harder for you to know what was going on. You found yourself becoming frustrated and took over the conversation, outlining what you think the next steps need to be to get things back on track.
Your gut is telling you that neither meeting went well.
Why didn’t you speak up and give your boss your opinion? What was causing your team member to be so unengaged?
Part of that answer is power.
Power is gained in many ways, one being through the role a person is assigned within an organization hierarchy. For example, a leader of a team has more power than members of the team. That power, when a leader uses it well, is of great benefit to a team. It gets a team important information that gives them necessary and useful context for their work. It helps them broker resources, expand networks and implement solutions to problems they face. It enables recognition, development, and promotion of team members.
On the flip side, that same power, when not used well, can get in the way of a team’s results.
Power imbalances have inherent risk for the party with less power and often, this impacts how information is exchanged in a workplace discussion. In one-one or team discussions between a boss and direct reports, it often happens that a direct report will respond to what the boss wants because that is what is safer. Putting a new idea forward, or expressing a different point of view, especially a dissenting one, is riskier than complying or holding back.
This dynamic exists under the surface of discussions with neither party being aware of its presence or negative impact. In contrast, with awareness and skill, its impact can be minimized and even removed. Moreover, there is a greater responsibility on the leader to minimize the impact than the direct report.
Why? Because it’s the leader who has more power. A leader’s behavior is instrumental in influencing how candid and productive a meeting becomes. It’s up to the leader to create a space safe enough for a team member to fully participate in a discussion without inhibition. This takes intention, attention, effort and skill on the part of a leader but the payoffs are more productive discussions that take less time, and team members feeling more involved and engaged in their work. It’s worth it.
Here are a few things you can do to start reducing the negative impact of position power.
- Go into the discussion with an open and curious mindset.
- Truly seek to understand the other person’s views first before giving your own views.
- Honestly assess yourself on how well you are listening. If you’re not sure, get feedback.
For more suggestions, visit our website to download your free guide to 7 Ways to Level Up Your 1-1 Meetings. Implementing these recommendations will help you to make sure the power of your position doesn’t get in the way of your results but instead helps your results. You’ll leave meetings feeling much better about what was accomplished and how time was spent. Your team member will too!
