Recapping Factioned Meetings

In "Recapping One-on-One Meetings," Point Lookout for August 9, 2023, I described a practice that can make agreements reached between two people more effective and durable. Immediately after the meeting, recapping the agreements in an email message from one party to the other clarifies the points of agreement. More than that, it serves as a future reference, and it can be a basis for future negotiation if either party later recognizes a need to amend the agreement.

The practice A factioned team is one in which
the participants identify not with
the team as a whole, but with
factions within the teamof recapping agreements can also be helpful after small, focused meetings of more than two people, especially when the meeting is what I call "factioned." Since the term factioned meeting isn't standard, let me first explain what I mean by it, and then describe the practice of recapping factioned meetings.

Factioned meetings defined

A factioned meeting almost always results when a factioned team comes together for a meeting. A factioned team is one in which the participants identify not with the team as a whole, but with factions within the team. For example, consider a group of hardware engineers and software engineers who are developing a control panel for a new washing machine. The control panel consists of both hardware and software components. Suppose that the members of the software team consider their first allegiance to be the software team, and the members of the hardware team, likewise, consider their first allegiance to be the hardware team. So no member of either team considers their first allegiance to be the Control Panel Design Team. When the Control Panel Design Team meets to search for solutions to shared problems, the meeting is factioned, because the team is factioned.

Factioned teams need not be divided along technological lines. Cleavages can occur across sites, professions, and positions in the org chart. For the present, though, I'm considering only those factioned meetings that satisfy two constraints. The first constraint is that there are only two factions, and no neutral parties. This simplifies the exploration with little loss, because although more complicated situations do exist, they're less common. The second constraint is that the two factions are more or less equal in political power. When one faction is significantly more powerful than the other, their interaction is more accurately described as a transmission of commands followed by acknowledgment, rather than a negotiation of an agreement.

With those two constraints in mind, whatever agreements a factioned meeting might reach are at some risk of instability after the meeting, as members of the factions maneuver for advantage. It is this source of instability that recap messages can address.

Recap messages for factioned meetings

A recap message is a message sent by one faction to the other following a meeting in which they reached an agreement. It summarizes the terms of the agreement. Recap messages can more effectively stabilize agreements if their authors follow four simple guidelines.

Act quickly

Distribute the recap message as soon as possible after the meeting, while the details of the agreements are still fresh in the minds of all participants. As time elapses after the meeting, due to phenomena like the Mandela Effect [Dagnall 2018] and others, recollections of what was agreed can morph towards more preferable agreements, and away from the actual agreements.

Compose the recap message jointly

If the gulf between the factions is deep and wide enough, any recap messaging can entail a risk of exacerbating the division. To manage this risk, delegate the task of composing the message to just two people, one from each faction, to compose the recap message jointly.

Treat compound agreements with care

A compound agreement is a package of actions that each faction agrees to execute. The factions agree to two elements. First, they agree to execute all actions in the package assigned to them. Second they agree that any amendment to any element of the package triggers a renegotiation of the package. The renegotiation protects the parties from unanticipated consequences of change, and it therefore enables everyone to relax a bit.

Manage previous recap messages

As time passes and events unfold, any recap message can potentially be overtaken by those events. Whenever the parties meet, they would do well to review past agreements and reconfirm, revise, or retire previous recap messages.

Last words

In whatever way you compose the recap message, it's most important that everyone involved in either faction have an opportunity to review the recap message. You might not want to seek approval by consensus, but if everyone has a chance to review the message, any errors of recollection are likely to be discovered.  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!

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.

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:

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: III

We usually attribute departures from plan to poor execution, or to "poor planning." But one cause of plan ineffectiveness is the way we think when we set about devising plans. Three cognitive biases that can play roles are the so-called Magical Number 7, the Ambiguity Effect, and the Planning Fallacy.

Unrecognized Bullying: III

Much workplace bullying goes unrecognized because of cognitive biases that can cause targets, perpetrators, bystanders, and supervisors of perpetrators not to notice bullying. The Halo Effect and the Horn Effect are two of these biases.

Additive Bias…or Not: I

When we alter existing systems to enhance them, we tend to favor adding components even when subtracting might be better. This effect has been attributed to a cognitive bias known as additive bias. But other forces more important might be afoot.

Additive bias…or Not: II

Additive bias is a cognitive bias that many believe contributes to bloat of commercial products. When we change products to make them more capable, additive bias might not play a role, because economic considerations sometimes favor additive approaches.

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