Managing ‘The People in Your Neighbourhood’ Around the Board Table

Like learning the Hungarian language or calming down an angry two-year-old, chairing or facilitating a Board meeting is hard. 

All groups have moods that are always changing, which directly impacts the level of productivity and accomplishment the group can achieve. The dynamics of any group, let alone a Board of Directors or a Senior Leadership team, are constantly in a slow but steady flux. Knowing the motivations and personalities of the people around the table, and how to recognize each individual’s direct or indirect impact on the group, is crucial for the Chair or facilitator’s success.

Through our work, we have facilitated and choreographed literally hundreds of group conversations. And we’ve come to identify the cast of characters that one often sees around a Board or leadership team table.

These are the People in Your Neighbourhood

• The Leader of the Opposition. They often disagree with an idea or create tension just for the fun of it. In some group contexts, they will physically sit on the opposite side from the meeting Chair or facilitator. This is different from productive devil’s advocacy – which is essential to the high-performance of a group or team. 
• The Court Jester. They often don’t have the deepest subject matter expertise, or ability to connect the dots. Court Jesters typically hate conflict (and thus use humour and levity to diffuse tension), or just remain uncomfortably silent when there are disagreements. When they do get passionate or voice an opinion powerfully, it is best to listen – as they will have creative ideas or a different lens through which they see opportunities that can be very valuable. 
• The Expert ‘From Out of Town’. On not-for-profit or public sector Boards, these are the people with private sector work experience who will – and every single opportunity that they get – remind everyone else of their private-sector work experience.
• The Details Aficionado who Definitely did the Pre-Read. They will turn your attention to the spreadsheet on slide 43, and seek clarification on exactly how one specific number was derived. And they will also let the full room know if there was a single spelling mistake in any of the materials.
• The High School Debating Champion. An expert in the arts of rhetoric, they sway opinion with appeals to emotion, or a one-off story that tugs at the heart-strings. People love to hear them speak, but they often don’t help the group get to the best solution.
• The “Representer”. This person sees their role as advocating for and defending a special interest group – rather than understanding their fiduciary obligations for the organization as a whole. On occasion, their nuanced understanding of how the interest group they deem themselves to represent can be useful. But when they begin every statement or make every argument based on what they consider to be in the best interests of their group (which it often isn’t) it becomes tiresome.  
• The Introverted Genius. They do a lot of listening, connect dots, and often sit in silent frustration if the conversation isn’t progressing productively. They often wait until near the end of an agenda item to make their point, which is usually brilliant. As a Chair or facilitator, call upon these people to ensure their ideas are heard – as they are reluctant to speak up on their own.

Make Sure You Hear from the ‘Second Follower’

Keeping the diverse personalities within any Board or organization happy is a huge challenge. Yet group harmony should be a secondary objective, in the service of getting to better answers and decisions.

In our work with Boards, we often say that we hate consensus. That’s because consensus often means the group is accepting what might be a weak, beige, bland conclusion – as opposed to pushing a bit harder to get to an elegant solution or bigger idea.

Worse, succumbing to the easiness of consensus can be dangerous. Especially when dealing with issues related to outside groups, competitors, or relationships with another organization.

Here is a scenario that plays out frequently, often in the ‘other business’ part of the meeting. 

Someone will flag a concern about another group or organization, assuming ill-intent or hostility. Then another person around the table (the first follower) will agree. 

At this point, there is a belief that the other group or organization’s motives are indeed  hostile and a threat. And an ‘us and them’ dynamic is presumed, with our organization as the good guys, and that other group as the enemy.

This is a critical moment for the person leading the conversation because a point of view is building. And depending on the influence of the two people who have spoken thus far, the rest of the group may be feeling pressure to agree and get on board.

At that moment, it is critical for the Chair or facilitator to say: “I’d welcome a different perspective on this…”. And hear from the ‘second follower’. Ideally, someone like the Introverted Genius who might play devil’s advocate – and avert an escalation or battle with an external group who is not there to share a very different side of the story.

At Google, when everyone in a meeting is in strong agreement, it is common practice to ask someone to argue for the contrarian point of view (which is when having a Leader of the Opposition comes in handy). Simply pushing the conversation to invite a minority opinion can help the group get to a better answer or avoid escalating an unnecessary battle with those who weren’t in the room, and whose motives may be entirely different from what was supposed.

Know your cast of characters. And work hard to help them to get to the best solution, not just a popular one, while also helping them to feel heard and positive about their personal contributions.

Want help managing the people in your neighbourhood? Click here to read more about our executive facilitation best practices.