4 ms·

Yes, it's common especially in places where it goes un-checked. One idea that can work to start to change this behavior is to verbalize when someone else is cut

Yes, it's common especially in places where it goes un-checked. One idea that can work to start to change this behavior is to verbalize when someone else is cut off. "Bob, it sounded like you were had something to add." If you start helping others get a word in some folks will start to get the message. Another, more direct approach, is feedback to those that keep cutting folks off. Finally, you can push for "retro" type meetings where you bring up this kind of thing. If you are feeling this way fore sure others are and you will start to see retention issues and a company filled with a mono culture of folks. The keyword to look into is "psychological safety" and how to foster that.

stcredzero 7y ago
I don't think it's best to think of this in terms of "safety." Interruption is a dark pattern. It enables the user of the pattern to gain more attention and get more "turns" at speaking, but does it at the expense of group members being able to express complicated or difficult concepts. It's a pattern which suppresses thought and information.
- asfarley 7y ago
  Do you see the value in interrupt-based software? Why should there be any real distinction between software message-passing and human message-passing? The complete rejection of interruption-during-conversation is equivalent to the denial of existence of far-too-long monologues, isn't it?
  - tchaffee 7y ago
    "Excuse me this is taking too long, please wrap up" is not the same as taking over the conversation.
- andymoe 7y ago
  Totally agree it can be a dark pattern but also sometimes folks just don’t realize their behaviors consequences on those around them. To clarify, pushing the org in the direction of fostering “physiological safety” allows folks to bring things like this up without fear of reprisal. (Google for studies on the term) When issues are surfaced they are more likely to be addressed and the company or team can become more effective since more folks have an opportunity to contribute fully rather than shutting down to protect themselves as the original post describes. Turns out effective human interaction is good for business.

stcredzero 7y ago

I don't think it's best to think of this in terms of "safety." Interruption is a dark pattern. It enables the user of the pattern to gain more attention and get more "turns" at speaking, but does it at the expense of group members being able to express complicated or difficult concepts. It's a pattern which suppresses thought and information.

asfarley 7y ago
Do you see the value in interrupt-based software? Why should there be any real distinction between software message-passing and human message-passing? The complete rejection of interruption-during-conversation is equivalent to the denial of existence of far-too-long monologues, isn't it?
- tchaffee 7y ago
  "Excuse me this is taking too long, please wrap up" is not the same as taking over the conversation.
andymoe 7y ago
Totally agree it can be a dark pattern but also sometimes folks just don’t realize their behaviors consequences on those around them. To clarify, pushing the org in the direction of fostering “physiological safety” allows folks to bring things like this up without fear of reprisal. (Google for studies on the term) When issues are surfaced they are more likely to be addressed and the company or team can become more effective since more folks have an opportunity to contribute fully rather than shutting down to protect themselves as the original post describes. Turns out effective human interaction is good for business.