On Schedule Conflicts

When you need to attend (or want to attend) two meetings scheduled for the same time slot, you'll eventually resolve the conflict somehow, because you can't attend both. To resolve the schedule conflict, you must address two issues. The first is whether you'll attend the one that matters most, and the second is whether this schedule conflict will occur again. This post provides guidance for those seeking to resolve both issues.

Four factors that increase the incidence of schedule conflicts

Schedule conflicts are unavoidable. But when schedule conflicts are common, they might indicate that something is amiss. That's why it's useful to consider possible implications of a high incidence of schedule conflicts. Here are four factors that can contribute to an elevated level of schedule conflicts.

Too many projects for the available staff

If you have a high-level role in your organization, or if your role is critical for multiple projects or functions, schedule conflicts are less common for you than for others, because people tend to schedule things to accommodate you. That's unfortunate, because that practice insulates you from the level of double booking that others experience. And that insulation can delay your realizing that there's too much happening in the organization — too many projects, too many functions, or maybe just too many meetings.

Consider adopting an alternative organizational structure that has fewer projects or functions that require the attention of someone in your role.

Micromanagement

Perhaps one cause of the scheduling conflicts isn't the need for you to be in two places at once, but is instead your own desire to be. An elevated level of schedule conflicts could be a signal that you're engaging in micromanagement.

If you've delegated responsibility for a project or function to others, let them execute. Make certain that they have what they need to do the job, and then get out of their way.

Too many meetings: Time-slot squatting

Time-slot squatting is the wasteful practice of conducting a "regular" meeting in a regular time slot whether or not the meeting is necessary. Usually the time slot is on a specific day of the week, either weekly or bi-weekly. By conducting the meeting regularly, the meeting owner hopes to keep the designated time slot open for all attendees. The fear is that if the meeting isn't held regularly, other meeting owners will be able to "claim" the slot for themselves. If that happens, the fearful meeting owner believes, finding a time to hold the meeting when all can attend will become difficult even if the meeting is necessary.

Time-slot Time-slot squatting is the wasteful practice
of conducting a "regular" meeting in a
regular time slot whether or not
the meeting is actually necessarysquatting feeds on itself. That is, because those who refrain from the practice quickly find themselves unable to find conflict-free times for meetings, there is an incentive to adopt the practice. The problem can be resolved, but only at the organizational level. The key to resolution is reducing the average number of meetings each person must attend. And that might require reducing the number of projects "in flight."

Toxic political conflict

Some double booking is intentional. For example, suppose Person A must — absolutely must — attend Meeting #1. And suppose the agenda of Meeting #2 includes an action that Person A opposes. To ensure that Person A cannot attend Meeting #2, Chair #2 (the owner of Meeting #2) schedules Meeting #2 to conflict with Meeting #1. This can happen as a result of a political rivalry between Person A and Chair #2, or some other rivalry for which Person A and/or Chair #2 are proxies.

This sort of thing arises from unresolved toxic political conflict. The problem here isn't one of scheduling. The parties to the conflict must resolve the conflict, possibly with "supervisory encouragement."

Last words

Knowledge of the incidence of schedule conflicts can be helpful in focusing the attention of Management on addressing this issue. Fortunately, the organization's calendar software probably has all the data required to determine the frequency of schedule conflicts. By weighting the importance of each meeting, we can create a metric that exposes trends in schedule conflicts and their importance. Together with data about cancellations, absenteeism unrelated to time off, and the incidence of rescheduling, we can produce a clear representation of the scale and impact of the problem.  Top    Next Issue

Do you spend your days scurrying from meeting to meeting? Do you ever wonder if all these meetings are really necessary? (They aren't) Or whether there isn't some better way to get this work done? (There is) Read 101 Tips for Effective Meetings to learn how to make meetings much more productive and less stressful — and a lot more rare. Order Now!

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 Cognitive Biases at Work:

How to Get Overwhelmed

Here's a field manual for those who want to get overwhelmed by all the work they have to do. If you're already overwhelmed, it might explain how things got that way.

The Planning Dysfunction Cycle

Some organizations consistently choose not to allocate enough resources or time to planning for their most complex undertakings. Again and again, they decline to plan carefully enough despite the evidence of multiple disappointments and chaotic performance. Resource contention and cognitive biases conspire to sustain this cycle of dysfunction.

Red Flags: III

Early signs of troubles in collaborations include toxic conflict, elevated turnover, and antipatterns in communication. But among the very earliest red flags are abuses of power. They're more significant than other red flags because abuses of power can convert any collaboration into a morass of destructive politics.

Seven Planning Pitfalls: I

Whether in war or in projects, plans rarely work out as, umm well, as planned. In part, this is due to our limited ability to foretell the future, or to know what we don't know. But some of the problem arises from the way we think. And if we understand this we can make better plans.

On Reporting Noncompliance

Regulating compliance with process design in organizations requires monitoring process usage. Typically, process monitors depend on reports from process participants. In blame-oriented cultures, fear of retribution can limit what these reports contain.

See also Cognitive Biases at Work and Cognitive Biases at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

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