Solution-Building?: The Rules, Part 7

In this post I will be looking at the next of the Solution-Building Guidelines:

Guideline Number 5:  No Personal Agendas Allowed

While all the Guidelines are about the three principles of commitment, objectivity, and courtesy, this one really touches on objectivity. 

When we walk into a situation or a meeting with a specific outcome that we intend to see as the result, this is a personal agenda. We have made up our mind ahead of time about what will happen and we intend to see that result, no matter what else is presented. 

This is hardly a recipe for listening to others (courtesy), looking for the most effective solution (objectivity), or commitment to not just the process but also to the group you are working with. 

What is a personal agenda and why is it a problem? After all, most of us go into meetings with some idea of what we would like to see as the outcome. Isn’t that a personal agenda? 

Yes, and no.

At some level, it qualifies as a personal agenda since it is something that we want to see result from the meeting or discussion. This is how I prepare myself for many meetings. It helps me understand what I am thinking and allows me to pre-consider alternatives that I would be happy with. It also helps me with having at least a somewhat objective attitude when I am actually in the meeting or discussion.

Currently, we are dealing with the aftermath of a flooded basement, including contractors and suppliers. I have been doing a lot of mail-ordering of supplies and replacement furniture, as a result of Covid-19-related restrictions on going into stores and other places. I have negotiated discounts on multiple purchases as well as returns of some cabinetry that, on arrival, were either damaged or not nearly as appropriate “in the flesh” as they appeared to be on a computer screen. 

In each case, I have determined not only what I would like to have as the outcome but also how much give-and-take I would be satisfied with. Yes, I had a personal agenda, but I went into each situation willing to listen to ideas that I may not have thought of myself. In fact, in one case I ended up with a very different solution that I had in mind, but one that was both reasonable and ended up saving me a lot of work.

So if I have personal agendas, why am I saying, in Guideline Number 5, that they are not allowed? 

What is not allowed, in this context, is a personal agenda that starts with the premise that there is one and only one allowable result: that of the agenda holder. 

When someone goes into a meeting or discussion with that type of personal agenda, they have already decided that their ideas and desires are the only important ones in the group. They either simply will not listen to others or will have a set of reasons they are correct, irrespective of any other information or ideas that may be different. They are closed-minded because they have the right solution and no one else does.

Personal agendas, as described in the preceding paragraph, can make real objective discussion of the topic and the introduction of a range of possible decisions or solutions, difficult if not actually impossible. The participant who has decided that his solution is the only one acceptable will derail the discussion with objections to any other ideas offered, finding and attacking flaws and ignoring strengths and merits that should be examined. The attacks are too often aimed at the person bringing the idea to the table, which of course hits on the principle of courtesy. He will also simply continue to insist that his solution is the “best” and should be adopted and often will simply wear the group down. 

In doing this, of course, he will make many of his fellow participants unhappy. They may refuse to work with him again and will feel that their thoughts and ideas were not even considered. This can be a real blow to morale in, and a loss of commitment to, the organization. 

After a decision is made based on one person’s personal agenda, there can also be little commitment on the part of others to act based on that decision. This sets a stage that, if the decision turns out not to achieve the desired result, the person who was insisting that his decision be adopted will blame others for the failure, further alienating his colleagues.

It boils down to ego; the conviction that one person and only one has the right answers. This conviction is a major component of the personal agenda. 

This leads us to Guideline Number 6, the next subject.

---

Like what you’re reading? Order your copy of Moving Beyond Compromise here or sign up for our newsletter here.