It would seem to me in this electronic age, the traditional committee and/or staff meeting is becoming outmoded. The evening of November 1, I attended a small gathering of individuals to listen to a lecture on Mormonism and the environment. After the BYU prof made his PowerPoint presentaion, there was a lengthy Q&A session. This latter activity was dominate by one very loud, overbearing, and foul-mouthed individual. While I didn’t disagree with most of her points, but why did she think her opinions were more cogent than those of others in the audience? By her dominating the conversation, we will never know what others attending were thinking. We will never know what the silent individuals could have brought to the discussion.
At a recent 2-day committee get-together in Phoenix, a similar scenario unfolded. One professional (even though he wasn’t loud or foul-mouthed) dominated the discussions. It was as if his ego couldn’t handle the participation of others; as if he felt he was the only credible expert. The get-together was truly international with video hookups to both France and Australia. I left feeling that the discussions could have benefitted from more diversity in the participation.
At a Sunstone management workshop last summer, a similar drama occurred. One foul-mouthed, loud individual seemed to dominate most of the discussions. Again, I wondered, what was lost? Whose creative ideas got buried in the singular vocal barrage?
I guess a part of the difficulty was the chairperson’s inability to keep control of the discussions. I know professional facilitators have methods to overcome the dilemma of conversation monopolizers. But many times their methods seem contrived, and rarely do they encourage the type of interplay necessary to move an issue, product, or project forward. The audience participation ends up being shallow. It would seem like some of the recent developments with social networking might allow for better exchanges of ideas. While face-to-face contact is still important, perhaps it is less so in the professional arena.
As I look back on my own personal experiences, I know there have been meetings where I have talked and/or ranted too much. So its hard for me to be too hard on others. I should also note that language is not generally a problem with me unless it is misogynistic or racist. But I think it is important to understand the participants in a get-together (your audience) before you open your mouth. Maybe the f-bomb isn’t appropriate for quasi-religious events.
