Which have you found more valuable or necessary – to train teams to say "no" or to equip them with the skills to negotiate compromises?
Sort by:
The approach depends on the organization's culture. In my current collaborative environment, saying no is less acceptable than in other places I've worked. Here, everyone is considered a team member, and we work together for the common good. While we may eventually reach a no, we don't start there. It's more about exploring possibilities and ensuring everyone is aligned with the organization's goals. If a no is necessary, it comes with more weight after thorough discussion and consideration.
I lean towards saying no initially, but in a polite and data-driven manner. Teams should be aware of their priorities and bandwidth, and when a request comes in, they should present the data and either ask for a trade-off or explain why it's not feasible at the moment. There is room for negotiation, but the initial response should be grounded in facts.
That approach resonates with me. It's crucial to remain flexible and avoid becoming rigid, as that can lead to being perceived as blockers. We strive to be seen as understanding and adaptable rather than difficult.
I believe it's more important to equip teams with the skills to negotiate compromises. I want my team to be open-minded and collaborative, finding common ground when possible rather than simply saying no.
I agree with Robyn. Ability to compromise is key. In every request there is some amount of value, nobody asks for something without some reason. The key is to ensure that the cost is aligned to the value. We need to compromise to move forward. Saying no is not being open to ideas. And what i have found is that giving a little is the start to a solution.