21 Comments
User's avatar
Marginal Gains's avatar

Excellent post!

I read somewhere long ago that if you use the word “but” in a sentence, people often ignore everything before it and focus only on the following negative part. I’ve also observed this in my interactions with others. No matter how many positive things are said before the word “but,” they are typically overlooked. Using alternatives like “and” or “however” is a more effective strategy to convey a message's positive and negative aspects without overshadowing the positive.

Additionally, based on my observations, you are correct that most people stay quiet or avoid speaking if they feel their ideas will be rejected or perceive that the person with the loudest voice will dominate the conversation. Psychological safety plays a crucial role in addressing this issue. When people feel safe to express their ideas without fear of judgment or retaliation, they are more likely to contribute. However, it’s also important to actively encourage participation. Some individuals will only speak up if explicitly invited, while others might prefer to share their thoughts privately outside the meeting.

This behavior can often be attributed to personality traits like introversion and extroversion. Extroverts think by talking, while introverts process internally and typically need time to reflect before expressing their thoughts. Understanding these personality differences is key to devising effective strategies. For example, allowing quieter individuals to speak early in a discussion before louder voices and extroverts dominate can create a more balanced dialogue. Revisiting quieter voices to hear their perspectives toward the end of the meeting is another practical approach.

Knowing your team’s personalities and preferences helps in tailoring strategies to ensure everyone feels heard. Encouraging pre-meeting preparation by providing an agenda and document about the discussion topic so everyone has time to think about the subject before coming to the discussion, structuring discussions to include everyone, and creating follow-up opportunities are additional strategies that can improve participation and collaboration in group settings.

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

Exactly. I thought about pulling in personality however I ran out of space.

Expand full comment
Klaus Hubbertz's avatar

Some basics for successful idea-generation in a team:

- no egomaniacs participate,

- all must have real skin in the game,

- expertise in similar projects has good value but is not vital,

- expertise in entirely different field can add enormous value by joining in unprecedented ways,

- pause in-between,

- sleep over it,

- ...

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

And.. use tools that allow everyone to engage. I often allow anonymous online comments so people can type out ideas. They get treated the same as anyone else's.

Expand full comment
Klaus Hubbertz's avatar

👍👍👍 🔥🔥🔥

A brain is a brain is a brain, whether from an individual in front of you, deeply involved in the common project or currently just relaxing in a hammock fixed to a coconut tree

overlooking an azure lagoon and joining via Starlink or local Wifi ...

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

I need more of that last part

Expand full comment
Klaus Hubbertz's avatar

me too ... 🤣🤣🤣

Expand full comment
Martin Prior's avatar

This gets the heart of how we can build ideas rather than shoot something down based on one small detail.

A great exercise you can do to help with this is a version of "crazy eights".

Take a piece of paper and divide it into 8 by folding length ways and then twice width ways.

Each person in the room (ideally more than 3 people) takes a piece of paper. Start a timer and each person draws or explains an idea for solving the problem in the first of the eight blocks. After 1 min, pass your paper onto the next person.

Start the timer again for one min. Each person takes the first idea written down by the other person and in the second block adds to the idea. After the minute is up, pass it on again.

Keep going until al 8 blocks are filled. (if there are less than 8 in the room you will get your first idea back again - this time though you will see how everyone else has added to it.

By the end you will have a number of ideas that everyone in the room has some ownership in that have build on the original ideas.

You can then work through the best ones, without people talking down any one idea out of personal agendas.

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

That's interesting. Reminds me a bit of the Thinking Hats exercise too.

Expand full comment
Martin Prior's avatar

Yes, very similar.

Expand full comment
Rudy Fischmann's avatar

For me, the concept of “spitballing” aka brain storming was difficult for me for much of what you’re describing here. I would get possessive of my ideas and take adaptations as as a slight. And when someone would suggest something, I’d be critical. I was missing the point and it created a lot of stress for me. Understanding that this was collaboration with a common goal made everything easier and more productive. And the team got along better too. 🤣 it was an important lesson that I wished I learned earlier.

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

Great insights!

Expand full comment
Salvador Lorca 📚 ⭕️'s avatar

Good insight 😌 Can i translate part of this article into Spanish with links to you and a description of your newsletter?

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

Thanks and absolutely!

Expand full comment
Angela Marrant's avatar

Love the part on criticism 👍😀😬

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

Thanks! You might also like how that element ties into critical thinking in that essay.

Expand full comment
Jake Gless's avatar

bro spreading AI art is garbage personal character

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

That is certainly an ironic criticism.

Expand full comment
Jake Gless's avatar

but you’re a trumpee

Expand full comment
Michael Woudenberg's avatar

Never voted for the man. Even if I did, what you just did was bullshit argumentation. Even so, my politics are much more nuanced than that. Check it out, I lay it all bare: https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/quantum-superposition-and-politics

Expand full comment
Nico Appel's avatar

You’re so classy, Michael. Love it

Expand full comment