Managing Dominant Team Members in Meetings
We’ve all been in team meetings where no one can get a word in edgeways due to dominant members of the team occupying the air space ! So why do some people feel the need to dominate and what can you do to address this ?
Effective team meetings are critical for fostering collaboration, making decisions, and driving projects forward. However, managing dominant team members can be a challenge, as their assertiveness may inadvertently stifle input from others, skew decision-making, or lead to frustration among quieter team members. By implementing strategic approaches grounded in research and best practices, leaders can create a more balanced and inclusive meeting environment. So why do certain people manifest dominance in meetings ?
Understanding Dominance in Team Dynamics
Dominance in meetings often manifests as frequent interruptions, monopolization of speaking time, or steering discussions towards personal interests. While dominant members may bring valuable insights and energy, their behavior can unintentionally overshadow the contributions of others, potentially diminishing the overall effectiveness of the group (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). Certain individuals may act dominant in meetings due to personality traits, such as high extraversion or assertiveness, or as a response to perceived threats to their status within the group. Additionally, dominance can arise from a desire to control outcomes or ensure their ideas are heard, particularly in high-stakes scenarios (Anderson & Brion, 2014; Wisse & Sleebos, 2016).
Strategies to Manage Dominant Participants
- Set Clear Expectations Begin meetings with a clear agenda and ground rules. Establishing norms such as “one person speaks at a time” and “every voice matters” creates a framework for respectful interaction (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2011). Additionally, distributing the agenda beforehand allows all members to prepare their contributions, reducing the likelihood of any single person dominating.
- Facilitate Balanced Participation The role of the facilitator is critical in managing team dynamics. Techniques such as round-robin sharing or directed questions can ensure equal participation. For example, asking, “Let’s hear from someone who hasn’t spoken yet,” invites input from quieter members (Kerr & Tindale, 2004).
- Use Structured Techniques Structured decision-making tools, like brainstorming followed by prioritization or the Nominal Group Technique, (NGT ) can help balance participation. The NGT is a process by which individuals first generate ideas independently, followed by a group discussion to prioritize these ideas. This ensures that all contributions are considered before dominant voices can overly influence the discussion (Van Breda, 2019).These methods encourage individual input before group discussion, reducing the influence of dominant voices.
- Leverage Nonverbal Cues None verbal cues can be powerful in managing behaviours (ask any teacher !) . Facilitators can use nonverbal communication to subtly manage dominance. Making eye contact with quieter members, gesturing towards them to speak, or gently interrupting dominant participants with phrases like, “Let’s pause here to get others’ thoughts,” can help redistribute speaking time.
- Provide Feedback and Coaching Addressing dominant behavior privately can lead to positive changes. Frame feedback constructively, focusing on the impact of their behavior and suggesting alternative ways to contribute. For instance, say, “Your enthusiasm is valuable, but I’d like to ensure others have the opportunity to share their perspectives as well” (Hackman, 2002).
- Cultivate Psychological Safety Psychological safety—the belief that one can speak up without fear of negative consequences—is essential for inclusive meetings. Leaders should model vulnerability, acknowledge diverse viewpoints, and actively encourage participation from all members. (Allen et al, 2023)
Managing dominant team members requires a proactive and empathetic approach. By setting clear expectations, facilitating balanced participation, and fostering a culture of psychological safety, leaders can create a meeting environment where all voices are heard and valued. This not only enhances decision-making but also strengthens team cohesion and morale.
References
- Anderson, C., & Brion, S. (2014). Perspectives on power in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 67-97.
- Allen, J, A. Lehmann-Willenbrock, The Key Features of workplace meetings: Conceptualising the why, how and what of meetings at work, Organisational Psychology Review, London Sage.
- Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Scott, Foresman.
- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
- Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Harvard Business Press.
- Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623-655.
- Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124.
- Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Meinecke, A. L., Rowold, J., & Kauffeld, S. (2011). How transformational leadership works during team interactions: Insights from a video-based field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1013-1024.
- Wisse, B., & Sleebos, E. (2016). When the dark ones gain power: Perceived position power strengthens the effect of supervisor Machiavellianism on abusive supervision in work teams. Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 122-126.
Professor Jacqueline Baxter EDd MA PGCE PFHEA CMBE Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences 