Red Flags: I

The use of actual red flags to warn others of looming danger traces back some 400 years that we know of. Seventeenth-century warships flew red flags to indicate they were preparing for imminent military engagement. In some rail systems, before the introduction of colored lights, red semaphores were used to signal trains to stop. That there are many other examples of red flag warnings probably accounts for the use of the term red flag to mean a general indicator of trouble ahead.

A catalog of red flags for workplace collaborations could provide a handy checklist for determining when it might be time to intervene, or shut it down, or perhaps, move on to some other less fraught engagement. In that spirit I offer a list of red flags in three groups. This Part I emphasizes red flags associated with toxic conflict and voluntary turnover. In the next post, I'll describe red flags associated with communication, and in the post after that, red flags associated with abuse of power.

Toxic conflict

Creative conflict in collaborative work is essential to achieving high-quality outcomes. Creative conflict ensures that we test all ideas and account for all relevant viewpoints.

Toxic conflict is something else. In toxic conflict, the participants employ abusive personal attacks and threats, and abuse their political power in their efforts to resolve their differences. Although the group does reach a joint decision regarding the issue at hand, that decision is not based on the merits of the question. Instead, the decision is based on the relative political power of the contenders, and on their willingness and ability to devise tactics that destroy their opponents' careers, or failing that, to curtail their abilities to respond effectively.

If toxic conflict is repeated often enough, or if it occurs in the context of important decisions, it can cause the group to reach decisions that compromise its eventual success.

Capable people finding other things to do

Top contributors and leaders generally have alternatives. They need not remain in any position unless they want to. Because they do move on voluntarily when they learn of opportunities elsewhere, losing capable people occasionally isn't necessarily a red flag. It's the price of hiring capable people.

But an elevated An elevated frequency of capable
people moving on to more appealing
assignments can indicate serious troublefrequency of capable people moving on can indicate serious trouble. Another related indicator can be the inability of the organization to successfully recruit people with required levels of capability. Regard these phenomena as potential indicators that capable people are assessing the organization's health as questionable.

Leadership team volatility

In addition to the loss of capable people described above, there is a special factor associated with the exit of people from leadership positions. Organizational leaders are often aware of conditions that threaten organizational health — conditions that others might not be aware of. In some cases, it is the leader himself or herself who has brought about those conditions.

This privileged insight can cause leaders to make investment decisions that are supposedly prohibited by law. And some investment decisions are legal but revealing, such as a decision not to exercise options to purchase shares in the company. But these matters are usually well cloaked, and although they might indeed be red flags, they're invisible to most people.

In any case, elevated incidence of sudden exits of persons in leadership roles can indicate trouble ahead — or trouble that has already arrived, but which hasn't yet been recognized.

In next week's edition, we'll examine red flags associated with communication.   Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

The Shape of the Table

Not only was the meeting running over, but it now seemed that the entire far end of the table was having its own meeting. Why are some meetings like this?

Appreciate the Moment

Often, we focus our awareness where we aren't or when we aren't. Whether we're in a heated meeting, or blowing out the candles of a birthday cake, being fully present can make our experiences more positive and memorable. Why are we so often someplace else? When we are, how can we come back? Or better, how can we stay fully present when we want to?

Social Distancing for Pandemic Flu

It's time we all began to take seriously the warning about a possible influenza pandemic. Whether or not your organization has a plan, you can do much to reduce your own chances of infection, and the chances of mass infection, by adopting a set of practices known as social distancing.

Discussion Distractions: I

Meetings could be far more productive, if only we could learn to recognize and prevent the distractions that lead us off topic and into the woods. Here is Part I of a small catalog of distractions frequently seen in meetings.

Deciding to Change: Choosing

When organizations decide to change what they do, the change sometimes requires that they change how they make decisions, too. That part of the change is sometimes overlooked, in part, because it affects most the people who make decisions. What can we do about this?

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming January 22: Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?

The Storming stage of Tuckman's model of small group development is widely misunderstood. Fighting the storms, denying they exist, or bypassing them doesn't work. Letting them blow themselves out in a somewhat-controlled manner is the path to Norming and Performing. Available here and by RSS on January 22.

And on January 29: A Framework for Safe Storming

The Storming stage of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups is when the group explores its frustrations and degrees of disagreement about both structure and task. Only by understanding these misalignments is reaching alignment possible. Here is a framework for this exploration. Available here and by RSS on January 29.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info