2 ms·

Good point. My impression is that it comes down to things like hierarchy, tact, charisma, political acumen. And if someone is deliberately derailing, there migh

by ilaksh 5y ago

Good point. My impression is that it comes down to things like hierarchy, tact, charisma, political acumen. And if someone is deliberately derailing, there might not be an indirect strategy that's effective. You may simply have to bring it up again explicitly. And personally I think that if it's clear someone is interfering then it may be necessary and advisable to call them out on it depending on the urgency. But it's not a minor issue. Something like that can absolutely kill a project or your career. My belief is that they only way to really be free of that is to have the ability to fire people who do too much politicking or whatever. Such as being the boss.

dane-pgp 5y ago
> You may simply have to bring it up again explicitly. Depending on the circumstances, it might be possible to bring up the issue later via email or a group chat, saying something like "One idea from the meeting which I think wasn't fully explored was...". For in-person meetings, though, I think that we can probably learn a lot from the rules of order used in places like parliaments and courts, where discussions are deliberately arranged to be turn-based, with an ostensibly neutral party (the speaker or the judge) who guides proceedings but isn't an active participant in the flow of dialogue.