By Tom Davidson
To get more introverts in the game, here’s my fifth installment on An Introvert’s Guide to Groups, this one about falling in love with the criteria before falling in love with the decision.
Because they speak up first and often, extraverts unwittingly establish the norms for their groups and teams. While this is not their fault, it’s no excuse for introverts who need to contribute to the debate with their own perspectives, ideas and recommendations.
To get more introverts in the game, here’s my fifth installment on An Introvert’s Guide to Groups, this one about falling in love with the criteria before falling in love with the decision.
Principle #5 – An Introvert’s Guide to Groups
Agree on the decision parameters first. Diverse individuals are likely to have their own ideas and perspectives, and the strength of teams comes from a blending of those ideas. However, without clear criteria, group decisions can quickly devolve into selling contests, which are often won by extraverts. When agreed upon early, parameters enable everyone to focus on what’s best for the organization.
This principle could be called, “Falling in love with the criteria before falling in love with your idea.” In other words, people tend to favor one idea or recommendation over others from the very beginning. This is true for introverts and extraverts, so this principle is universal.
Rather than foster a discussion that is simply a wrestling match among competing ideas, get the group to agree to the features you are all looking for in a final alternative before debating them. Here are three ways to do that:
1. Brainstorm a list of criteria the group is looking for in a final decision or recommendation. You might need to remind people of the rules of brainstorming before you begin (i.e., all ideas are valid, all ideas are recorded, build on others’ ideas, etc).
2. Combine like ideas, and then prioritize the remaining criteria so that the most important ones have more weight in the final analysis.
3. Develop a matrix with current alternatives across the top and the prioritized criteria down the side, and then as a group, discuss and note how well each alternative meets each criteria.