"Just talk last." One executive offered this solution to his peers at a recent Facilitative Leader workshop I was co-leading. What problem were the executives facing? It's a common one - you may have faced it yourself.

A number of executives had noticed a disturbing pattern when they met with their team of direct reports: after an executive shared his view on an issue, the direct reports didn't say anything that differed with the executive's view. Discussing this in the workshop, the executives thought that their direct reports were being overly influenced by the executive's point of view. In short, the executives felt they were losing valuable information and the best thinking from their team members. They didn't want a bunch of team members who would simply agree with them.

The executive who offered the solution, "Just talk last" was trying to ensure that the direct reports wouldn't be overly influenced by their team leader's point of view. It's a solution that I often hear from executives - and one that doesn't work. Here's why: "Talking last" is a unilateral strategy that addresses a symptom without getting to the cause of the problem.

If you applied the transparency test (see the June issue of Fundamental Change) to make your strategy explicit, you would say something like this to your team: "I've noticed that when we're discussing an issue, after I talk, no one offers a different point of view. This happens even when you've disagreed with me earlier. I'm thinking that's because you're concerned about disagreeing with me. This concerns me. So, to avoid this situation, I'm going to talk last, so that you won't know what my point of view is and you won't be able to figure out if you disagree with me before you speak. I think this will make you more likely to say what you're really thinking."

Making this strategy explicit shows how absurd it is. If your direct reports really are concerned about disagreeing with you, simply requiring them to talk before you talk won't solve the problem. They will just discover another creative approach to avoid having to openly disagree with you.

"Talking last" doesn't work because it avoids the root cause of the problem - that something is going on in the team that makes it difficult for direct reports to say what they're really thinking. Until you can raise that issue in the team, identify the root cause, and craft a solution that addresses the root cause, no solution will work.

Often, part of the cause is related to the team leader. Team members often won't disagree with a leader if they think they will suffer consequences for disagreeing or even if they believe that their information won't make a difference. You know you've solved the problem of "talking last" when you - or anyone - in the team can talk whenever they want without inappropriately influencing the conversation.

Here are the first steps you can take to name the issue, engage people in a conversation about it, and test your assumptions about what's going on:

1. Tell your team that you've noticed a pattern of behavior that you think is making the team less effective. Tell your team that you've noticed a pattern of behavior that you think is making the team less effective. Tell them that you want to talk about it with them and jointly decide what if anything the team needs to do differently. Mention that you may be part of the pattern without realizing it. You might say, "Over the last few weeks I've seen a pattern of behavior in our team that I think is making us less effective than we could be. I want to tell you what I've seen, get your thoughts, and see what if anything we do to do differently. I recognize that I may be contributing to the pattern I'm concerned about without realizing it."

2. Give specific examples of the behaviors you see that concern you, including that it's a pattern you've noticed. Then ask others if they've seen the same examples or seen something different. "In general what I've been seeing is that after I share my view on an issue, none of you share a different view, even if you've disagreed with me earlier in the meeting. Let me give you some specific examples and see if you remember them differently. [Give specific examples with people's names]. Does anyone see this differently?"

3. Share your thoughts about the team's behaviors with them. Then ask them if you're off base; if they think you are, ask them - what meaning do they make of it? "Based on what I've seen, I'm thinking you've got concerns about publicly taking a point of view that's different from mine. Am I correct or am I missing something?"

4. Be curious; ask about how you may be contributing to the problem. "I'm raising this issue because I want us to be able to really explore ideas; I think we'll get much better decisions that way. I'm wondering what, if anything, have I been doing that's leads you to be concerned about disagreeing with me?"

These opening steps will get you started, but you'll need to ask more questions, test more assumptions, share your own interests and find out others to craft a solution that will address the root cause. If you do this well, you won't have to worry about the when you talk. You can talk first, last, in the middle - at any time - confident that you've created an environment that your direct reports will share what they're thinking. What are your reactions or own experiences about this? Please join our conversation at the Mutual Learning Action Group.

2005 Roger Schwarz