Reaching Agreements in Technological Contexts

Reaching agreements about matters in technological contexts requires an approach that's similar to — but different from — reaching agreements in other contexts. Most of what's most readily available as guidelines for reaching agreements has been developed for other contexts, such as negotiations related to business formation, exchanges of assets, divorce, or matters of law. And these patterns can be helpful in technological contexts if suitably adapted. The key phrase here is suitably adapted. In this post I explore some of the distinguishing characteristics of technological contexts that make reaching agreements so challenging.

What a technological context is

For this purpose, a technological context is one primarily defined by a set of technological elements, either physical or conceptual. Examples of technological elements are devices or systems that exhibit behaviors or possess properties that are relevant to the disagreement, and which can be understood in terms of engineering or applied science. Another example is a representation of such a device or system, in combinations of diagrams, figures, and text.

The property of being technological is one of degree. The degree of importance of understanding the relevant engineering or applied science principles determines how technological the context is. Usually, and unfortunately, assessing the importance of such understanding requires a high level of that same understanding.

For example, a discussion regarding the weight-bearing capacity of a concrete driveway is a fairly technological context. By contrast, a discussion regarding sweeping leaves from that same concrete driveway is less likely to be a technological context.

How troubles arise in technological contexts

Attributes of Attributes of technological contexts
that are especially troublesome are
those that challenge interpersonal
skills of group memberstechnological contexts that are especially troublesome are those that challenge the interpersonal skills of group members. Difficulties arise, in part, when people believe they are conversing about a purely technical issue when they are actually confronting an issue that is essentially political or interpersonal. Below are three such attributes of technological contexts that create risks for groups seeking to reach agreement.

Breadth of knowledge

The knowledge required of a group involved in technical negotiations can be very broad indeed. In some situations the set of interacting technical artifacts can include items that are the responsibility of other groups or other enterprises. Or it can include legacy items developed long ago. In such cases, members of other groups or organizations might be detailed to participate in the negotiations as consulting experts. Or members of the group might be asked to "cram" a knowledge domain to help the group broaden its base of expertise.

Adding new members to a group — or removing members when you believe they've completed their work — can cause the group to traverse again several of the five stages of Tuckman's model of small group development. [Tuckman & Jensen 1977] This re-traversal can delay the arrival of agreement because it causes the group to revisit interpersonal issues that it had previously resolved.

If you anticipate the need to involve additional people, you can speed agreement by including them from the outset, rather than adding them only "when we really need their expertise."

Rapid evolution of domain knowledge

Rapid evolution of the relevant body of knowledge has two effects on groups as they reach for agreement. First, members must devote significant time and effort to maintaining their own knowledge currency. This workload can be so burdensome that members are compelled to be selective about what parts of the knowledge base they attend to carefully.

Second, members' personal grasp of relevant issues might not be synchronized. That is, some members might be aware of and have a grasp of a relevant change or innovation, while others might not.

When debates erupt, the first thing to check is the uniformity of knowledge currency across the group's members. The points of disagreement can often vanish when everyone becomes current.

Social skills deficits

"Soft skills" is a term that denotes a cluster of personal traits and abilities that enable members of social groups to form and maintain strong relationships. These skills include social facility, empathy, communication (reading, writing, speaking, and listening), teamwork, leadership, critical thinking, literacy, numeracy, trustworthiness, and more.

Higher educational institutions do emphasize preparing graduates for dealing with the technical components of technological contexts. But they tend not to emphasize soft skill development to an analogous extent. [Matteson, et al. 2016] This bias is perhaps most evident in the education of students aiming for careers in technology.

Organizations that depend for their success on the technical skills of their employees would do well to install and pursue a long-term program for soft skills development of all employees.

Last words

There are certainly many more attributes of technological contexts that create risks for groups seeking agreement about issues they face. For example, knowledge deficits in management ranks can cause managers to impose unreasonable or even irreconcilable constraints on teams that are engaged in problem solving. And because some organizations keep outmoded devices or practices in service alongside more modern components, enterprise asset bases are unnecessarily heterogeneous. That heterogeneity extends the persistence of the need for otherwise-obsolete knowledge for groups that must attend to those assets.

When teams have difficulty reaching agreements in technological contexts, the root cause might lie not in the team or its members, but in the context in which they work.  Top    Next Issue

Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!

More about Tuckman's sequence of small group development

The Politics of Forming Joint Leadership Teams  [January 4, 2023]

Some teams, business units, or enterprises are led not by individuals, but by joint leadership teams of two or more. They face special risks that arise from both the politics of the joint leadership team and the politics of the organization hosting it.

Tuckman's Model and Joint Leadership Teams  [January 18, 2023]

Tuckman's model of the stages of group development, applied to Joint Leadership Teams, reveals characteristics of these teams that signal performance levels less than we hope for. Knowing what to avoid when we designate these teams is therefore useful.

Beating the Layoffs: II  [November 20, 2024]

If you work in an organization likely to conduct layoffs soon, keep in mind that exiting voluntarily can carry advantages. Here are some advantages that relate to collegial relationships, future interviews, health, and severance packages.

White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development  [December 4, 2024]

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups.

Subgrouping and Conway's Law  [December 18, 2024]

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks.

The Storming Puzzle: I  [December 25, 2024]

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies to today's task-oriented work groups — if we adapt our understanding of it. If we don't adapt, the model appears to conflict with reality.

The Storming Puzzle: II  [January 1, 2025]

For some task-oriented work groups, Tuckman's model of small group development doesn't seem to fit. Storming seems to be absent, or Storming never ends. To learn how this illusion forms, look closely at Satir's Change Model and at what we call a task-oriented work group.

The Storming Puzzle: Six Principles  [January 8, 2025]

For some task-oriented work groups, Tuckman's model of small group development seems not to fit. Storming seems to be either absent or continuous. To learn how this illusion forms, look closely at the processes that can precipitate episodes of Storming in task-oriented work groups.

The Storming Puzzle: Patterns and Antipatterns  [January 15, 2025]

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies to today's task-oriented work groups, if we understand the six principles that govern transitions from one stage to another. Here are some examples.

Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?  [January 22, 2025]

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.

A Framework for Safe Storming  [January 29, 2025]

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.

On Shaking Things Up  [February 5, 2025]

Newcomers to work groups have three tasks: to meet and get to know incumbent group members; to gain their trust; and to learn about the group's task and how to contribute to accomplishing it. General skills are necessary, but specifics are most important.

On Substituting for a Star  [February 12, 2025]

Newcomers to work groups have three tasks: to meet and get to know incumbent group members; to gain their trust; and to learn about the group's task and how to contribute to accomplishing it. All can be difficult; all are made even more difficult when the newcomer is substituting for a star.

Footnotes

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 Effective Meetings:

Games for Meetings: I

We spend a lot of time and emotional energy in meetings, much of it engaged in any of dozens of ritualized games. Here's Part I of a little catalog of some of our favorites, and what we can do about them.

Is the Question "How?" or "Whether?"

In group decision making, tension sometimes develops between those who favor commitment to the opportunity at hand, and those who repeatedly ask, "If we do that, how will we do it?" Why does this happen?

Rationalizing Creativity at Work: I

Much of the work of modern organizations requires creative thinking. But financial and schedule pressures can cause us to adopt processes that unexpectedly and paradoxically suppress creativity, thereby increasing costs and stretching schedules. What are the properties of effective approaches?

How to Hijack Meetings

Recognizing the tactics meeting hijackers use is the first step to reducing the incidence of this abuse. Here are some of those tactics.

Meeting Troubles: Collaboration

In some meetings, we collaborate not in reaching objectives, but in preventing our doing so. Here are three examples of this pattern.

See also Effective Meetings and Effective Meetings for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming March 19: On Lying by Omission

Of the many devious strategies of workplace politics, deception is among the most commonly used. And perhaps the most commonly used tactic of deception is lying. Since getting caught in a lie can be costly, people try to lie without lying. Available here and by RSS on March 19.

And on March 26: Seven Ways to Support Word-of-Mouth About Your Content

Whether you're making a presentation or writing an article or a book, making your material more memorable is a desirable objective. After the talk, or after the reader sets down your work, what you have to offer will be accessible only if the auditor or reader remembers something about it. Available here and by RSS on March 26.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrentSgXnAlNVWlhxNIJner@ChacAtZoEYrrmofzZnjPoCanyon.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