The cast of characters typically remains the same. It is usually the same team members who watch the action in meetings and rarely, if ever, contribute to the discussion. They prefer to stay in the background and under the radar.
In most teams, their silence is accepted and viewed as a reflection of personality, not engagement. Whatever the underlying reason for their reticence, these team members are spectators and not full participants in team discussions. They like it that way. No harm, no foul, or so their thinking goes.
Unfortunately, the team doesn’t benefit from their wisdom, disagreement, or point of view. Discussions without the full chorus of voices and viewpoints are incomplete. The quality of decision-making suffers as a result.
Good leaders don’t allow anyone to become a meeting or discussion spectator. Using a version of the Socratic method, the best leaders keep everyone engaged and on their toes by peppering them with questions. These queries ask for team member views, opinions, and knowledge about whatever is being discussed. No one is safe from this curious assault, especially those with a reputation as spectators.
When leaders ask everyone to come prepared for the discussion and to prove it by being capable and ready to answer any question on the topic under review, the conversation becomes much more robust. By calling on people randomly to respond or offer their view, the entire team becomes engaged and motivated to contribute.
Once an expectation is set that no one can sit passively or remain silent during team meetings, the group benefits from different perspectives and viewpoints that otherwise would have been withheld. Asking everyone to contribute, share their ideas, and become fully involved in the discussion is what good leaders do through their Socratic questioning.
There is nothing more provocative than full engagement in a conversation. Team meetings and group decision-making are never spectator sports.
