Name: Why Smart Bosses Make Remote Employees Communicate Less, Not More | Inc.com
Brand: inc.com
SKU: inc-com-14
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Why Smart Bosses Make Remote Employees Communicate Less, Not More | Inc.com

preview

If many or all of your employees have been , you're probably concerned about the loss of actual&nbsp;face time. Not just in terms of leadership, but&nbsp;in those formal and (theoretically all-important) casual interactions and&nbsp;collaborations&nbsp;and ad hoc problem-solving moments among team members.(You know, like when&nbsp;Marcy runs into Mark in the hallway, he shares his struggles with a project, and her "outsider" perspective&nbsp;provides the aha! breakthrough&nbsp;Mark desperately needs.)Fortunately, technology offers substitutes. Slack.&nbsp;Teams. Zoom. Trello. Asana. Clockwise. Calendly.&nbsp;Instant meetings, whether formal or informal, mean&nbsp;instant collaboration, instant problem-solving, and instant&nbsp;creativity.Or not.For one thing, meetings are definitely overrated. One found that meetings make people dumber:&nbsp;When people were placed in small groups and asked to solve problems,&nbsp;their individual IQs dropped by an average of 15 percent.&nbsp;The problem? The feedback, even if only implicit, that&nbsp;meetings are intended to enhance.Examples: People who&nbsp;feel like a "junior" member of a group experience a temporary&nbsp;decrease in&nbsp;IQ. (As in most situations,&nbsp;.) People who feel their&nbsp;contributions won't be valued experience a&nbsp;temporary decrease in IQ.And people whose contributions have been criticized, however gently,&nbsp;experience&nbsp;a temporary&nbsp;decrease in IQ. (Which then causes&nbsp;that person to feel "junior," and that their contributions are less valued, making it even less likely they'll contribute meaningfully the&nbsp;next time.)In short: Not only are large for most of the participants,&nbsp;large meetings make it extremely unlikely to get the best from most of the people who participate.Especially where solving problems is concerned.A &nbsp;explored the value of connectivity and information flow in large teams. Fifty-one teams of 16 people each were given the same task: to discover and piece together&nbsp;clues that would help predict a fictional terrorist attack.&nbsp;Some teams had individuals share&nbsp;information with the entire team; think one big group chat.&nbsp;Other teams&nbsp;required individuals to only share information with one or two other&nbsp;team members; those individuals&nbsp;could then pass that information received on to one or two more people if they chose.As you would expect, the "mass communication" teams did better at gathering and sharing&nbsp;clues, and as a result&nbsp;all had access to the same&nbsp;"data."&nbsp;But then things fell apart. Instead of struggling to agree on a common theory of how the attack would take place--you would assume more people naturally means more opinions--the opposite happened: Those teams&nbsp;quickly settled on one (usually incorrect) theory.&nbsp;The problem wasn't diversity of opinion. The problem was groupthink.Because members of the less-connected teams couldn't collaborate as easily, they were less likely to reach a quick consensus. They had time to think. To create their own theories. To brainstorm on their own. To kick around and refine ideas&nbsp;with one or two people before presenting them to the entire group.&nbsp;As the researchers write, "Dense clustering encourages members of a network to generate more diverse information but discourages them from generating diverse theories; that is, clustering promotes exploration in information space but decreases exploration in solution space."Or in non-researcher-speak, brainstorming and initial problem-solving&nbsp;is much more effective when people first come up with&nbsp;ideas by themselves,&nbsp;or with one or two others.That will lead to greater diversity in ideas, better analysis of the pros and cons of those ideas,&nbsp;and much greater odds of the&nbsp;larger group&nbsp;eventually identifying&nbsp;the best idea.Of course, that doesn't mean you should do away with meetings altogether. Information still must be shared. Collaboration still must occur. Problems still must be solved.Just be thoughtful about how you make those things happen.Consider:Then your meetings will be more productive.And&nbsp;so will your employees. Engagement and responsibility aren't created by&nbsp;constant connectivity. Ownership starts with a feeling of control, independence, and authority.People care the most&nbsp;when they feel trusted to make things happen.And when they have the time&nbsp;-- the uninterrupted time --&nbsp;to make things happen.

If many or all of your employees have been , you're probably concerned about the loss of actual&nbsp;face time. Not just in terms of leadership, but&nbsp;in those formal and (theoretically all-important) casual interactions and&nbsp;collaborations&nbsp;and ad hoc problem-solving moments among team members.(You know, like when&nbsp;Marcy runs into Mark in the hallway, he shares his struggles with a project, and her "outsider" perspective&nbsp;provides the aha! breakthrough&nbsp;Mark desperately needs.)Fortunately, technology offers substitutes. Slack.&nbsp;Teams. Zoom. Trello. Asana....

public

Jeff Haden is a keynote speaker, ghostwriter, LinkedIn Influencer, contributing editor to Inc., and the author of The Motivation Myth: How High Achievers Really Set Themselves Up to Win.

Jeff Haden

jeff_haden

Inc. is an American business magazine founded in 1979 and based in New York City. It publishes eight print issues annually, as well as daily online articles and videos. Published by Mansueto Ventures. Inc. is best known for its annual rankings of the fastest-growing privately held companies in the United States, called the "Inc. 500" and "Inc. 5000."

Why Smart Bosses Make Remote Employees Communicate Less, Not More | Inc.com

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS