Great Teams Know How To Play The Ball and Not The Person

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about difficult conversations and how our emotions can get in the way of a good debate. Well, didn’t that set off some conversations! Thank you to those that shared some truly wild stories about team members, team leaders and some leaders at the top(!) that truly let their emotions run away from them!

After seeing a recent post from Adam Grant (image below) I was reminded of one other behaviour that significantly impacts the ability to have a robust discussion - and that is being able to differentiate between the idea of a person and the person themselves. More simply - the difference between ‘playing the ball and playing the person’

A quick reminder from a few weeks ago. Difficult conversations - crucial conversations - important conversations - whatever you call them, most people struggle with having them. According to one report, managers cited difficult conversations as the biggest challenge they face in their roles. Add to that that nearly 69% of managers are uncomfortable communicating with employees and 37% said they were uncomfortable giving direct feedback, and we have an environment in the modern workplace where people struggle with providing clear and open feedback - which makes conversations, and particularly difficult conversations - difficult.

So, ‘playing the ball and not the person’. I love a good sport analogy!?

A football phrase that applies to debating the issue and its merits, not attacking the person raising the issue. When I introduce this concept to most people, they often reply positively - it makes sense and seems perfectly logical - almost to the point of not even having to discuss it. However, that isn’t how most people respond in meetings. Meetings often have people wrap ideas and people up together, judging both - often harshly - at the same time. This results in people not wanting to raise ideas, not wanting to discuss things further, not wanting to engage.

When we have come up with an idea, developed a proposal, thought through a change to procedure - because we have invested time, effort and thought to the concept, we invest a little of ourselves into it as well. We often think of this as ‘our idea’, ‘our proposal’. When someone has some contrary thoughts on the idea, it is very easy to take them personally. What we often don’t bare in mind is that the person providing feedback on the idea is doing just that - providing feedback on the idea - not on your effort, thoughts and hard work to get it to that point. Without understanding on either side, we can create an environment where someone is absolutely going to take feedback on the idea personally, and any criticism or feedback of the idea is going to be taken as criticism of the person.

Anyone had that happen in a meeting?

Too often, thoughtful and robust debate deteriorates because someone - or often an entire team, can't different between the 'ball or the person' and either:?

1. Have their ideas wrapped up with their own ego - and then receive a critique of the work as well as they could, or?

2. Attach an idea to a person and judge both together.

So how do we get past this?

The best teams can separate the ideas from the person and have really heated, robust conversations - and can then chat afterwards with no ill feelings. These are the teams that are truly successful - but it takes work and some planning to get to this point.

How Do We Develop A Team To Play The Ball and Not the Person?

Simple: Preparation, Understanding and Reinforcement

1. Preparation. Introduce the metaphor of playing the ball and not the person. Expand on the metaphor ie. if we are both discussing the issue and things get a little heated, it is OK - we are both playing the ball. ‘Fair bump, play on’. If at any stage it gets personal, or someone takes things personally, we need to step back, and realise we pushed it too far (like a penalty). You will be surprised just how well people play to team rules when they are explained in advance.

2. Understanding. Start introducing ideas for discussion as ‘draft ideas’. Draft ideas can be debated, analysed and discussed - and the person that does the drafting is less likely to take offence to changes because they created a draft, not a final product. Drafts can go through multiple iterations to get better - that is the point of doing a draft. Asking a team member to prepare a ‘draft’ for discussion still requires effort and work - but it is less likely that the drafter is going to get ‘attached’ to the draft and take changes personally.

Putting your thoughts, ideas and concepts in front of a group for scrutiny takes something. Just thanking someone for putting their ideas out there to start the discussion, and appreciating the effort that it takes, goes a long way to setting team expectations around developing ideas, rather than blowing them up.

Once something has been debated and agreement (not full consensus) has been reached, then the idea can go from draft to real.

3. Reinforcement. Talking about a concept once at one meeting does not change a team behaviour. Discussing the concept before several meetings, asking people to prepare ‘draft’ concepts for discussion, understanding that draft ideas have the ability to change - all reinforce the idea of group discussion and shared debate.

Great teams learn how to create, share and debate ideas robustly for the benefit of the team. They also know how to create environments that allow that debate to happen. The concept of playing the ball and not the person is one way that can be created.

For other ideas on how to create great debate and great teams, follow us at https://www.developingleaders.com.au/blog/