Before going into controversial meetings, get together not only with your allies but also with those colleagues who just want to make sure that the meeting is productive. (These people exist—they can be the secretary to the executive committee or the chief of staff for an important executive.)

Imagine how the conversation might unfold and what kinds of objections or concerns will be raised. Think through how you should handle such objections—not necessarily how to defeat them but how best to explore the issue for the benefit of clarity and progress. And be sure to identify exit ramps so that you avoid ultimatums, unnecessary conflict, and perhaps even defeat. For example, what are you willing to trade or concede for partial progress? What halfway outcome are you willing to accept? How do you prevent the issue from getting kicked upstairs? (Our experience is that this is rarely a good outcome for rebels at work.)

When you engage in controversy, you will be most successful standing up for structural ideas that support the organization’s goals and values. You are advocating for positive change that supports what the organization believes is important.

Show what’s at stake by framing the idea in terms of what really matters. Show how your idea for change links to a core value, shared belief, or important story at work, such as protecting the organization’s reputation for integrity, saving government money, protecting people on the front lines, getting predictable results, or making the organization less vulnerable.

Paint a realistic picture of what could be. Show that the idea can work. The key verb here is show. Once your idea becomes controversial, assertions that it will work are not sufficient or persuasive. Find examples in which others succeeded by overcoming similar obstacles. Focus your examples on the implementation issues. Talk about another organization that successfully navigated uncertainties and obstacles similar to what your organization will face. This will be more meaningful and persuasive to the group than an abstract painting of the beautiful end state you aim to achieve.

On more than one occasion, we’ve gained credibility by surprising people with practicality. It’s important to have ideas that are firmly grounded in reality.

Make sure the meeting is long enough for what you want to accomplish, but not too long.

If this is the first time you’re presenting an idea and it’s a big, important idea requiring serious consideration and healthy debate, consider blocking off two to three hours instead of the typical hour-long meeting, which is really only 50 minutes by the time people get settled. A substantive, controversial meeting is a terrible thing to cut short. It takes time to explain your proposal and for people to wrap their minds around the possibilities. You don’t want to rush good thinking, especially on a controversial topic.

Before you go into a meeting, take 10 seconds to breathe and decide how you want to show up at (versus in) the meeting, including how you want to feel. Ask yourself: what would the best outcome be? Choose one word as your keyword to recall this vision. Here are some ideas: productive, constructive, intentional, lively—even adventurous.

Start by sharing the intent of the meeting and why it matters. (Even better, put that intent into the agenda you send out with the meeting invitation.) The more controversial the topic, the more important it is to create this clarity. One especially useful technique is to put the graphic shown in Figure 6-1 up in the meeting room.

Figure 6-1. Use this visual to keep meetings focused on vision (From Quiet Leadership: Six Steps to Transforming Performance at Work by David Rock)

Explain that the focus of this meeting is to talk about a vision for your particular “what’s at stake” issue, so you want to focus the discussion today on vision. Explain that today’s meeting is not about planning how to implement the proposal, delving into the details of how it would work, or exploring what could go wrong.

Make a productive statement like the following at the beginning of the meeting: “If I see that we’re losing our focus in the meeting, I’m going to step in and get us back on track. We want to make the best use of our time. Does that work for everyone?”

We’ve never heard of people saying no to this request. When they agree, you’ve just earned more power and control before the meeting even begins. If people start attacking your proposal and dragging it down into the weeds of detail, drama, or even problems, you can politely point to the visual. Remind the group that everyone agreed to focus on the vision and value of the proposal and suggest a way to get back on track with your agenda.

In addition to agreeing to stay focused on vision, we like to suggest participants agree on ground rules at the start of a session and post them on a wall. Again, people usually appreciate some rules for good conduct, and it helps focus attention on our ideas, not the controversy around the ideas. Some agreements we find useful are:

So now you’ve presented your idea, including the objections you anticipated. If you followed our guidelines, some two-thirds of the meeting should still be ahead of you. It’s time for discussion.

People come to support ideas by discussing them, not from hearing a presentation alone. You want to give everyone time to express their concerns, you want to be able to ask lots of questions to gain clarity, and you want time to end well.

Ask people what they like about the proposed idea immediately after finishing your presentation. When people are in a positive place, they are more open-minded. Help put them in a positive place by asking this question first.

Hear everyone out, acknowledge their points, and reiterate your stand with grace as well as strength. It is wiser to present your view without slamming other people’s ideas. Keep your head above the battle. In fact, if you find yourself on the attack, stop immediately. When we attack, we only hurt our reputation, our good ideas, and the credibility and trust we worked so hard to gain.

Ask for participants’ advice on how to make the idea work. Ask them what they think the next step for the proposal should be. Trust that other people can come up with solutions, too. Then when you share yours, look for the win-win solution by finding common ground to combine ideas.

Discuss for the purpose of achieving clarity, not to win and score points. Listen to others’ points. Respond to them in straightforward ways. Pose interesting questions to your critic: “What frightens you about this issue? What other ways might we be able to address this issue? What in the proposal do you think is worth consideration? Which of the points most concern you?” Ask interesting questions of your supporters as well, such as, “What part of the proposal or situation might be worth zooming into?”

To end well, make sure you stop 15 minutes before the meeting is scheduled to end. (We recognize that this is difficult to do, but this is a magical time, not to be short-changed. Some of the most useful insights and real issues come out during this wrap-up.)

Use this time to summarize what people liked about the proposal and their concerns. Then go around the room and ask each person to conclude by briefly sharing one or two comments: “What did you find potentially most valuable about this proposal? What do you think the next step should be?” No one comments on what anyone else says. It’s a way of ensuring that all voices are heard—not just the extroverts or negative BBB types—and provides a clear understanding of the whole group’s perspectives on the proposal.

One last thought. Pay attention to what’s happening as the meeting breaks up. We’ve both been amazed by the fascinating and useful observations people make when they stand up to leave a meeting. In some cases, the people who have been quiet during the meeting will only speak up at this time. We pay close attention to them when the session ends. In all cases, many appear to feel that they can be more informal and share what they really think when the meeting is officially over.

The original Riot Act was an English law, enacted by Parliament in 1715. If more than 12 people “tumultuously” assembled and refused to disperse within an hour of a magistrate reading a proclamation, they would be charged as felons. In the last century, “reading the riot act” has become a common expression. It’s usually a reprimand or warning to get rowdy characters to stop behaving badly. Reading the riot act is a high-intensity intervention for times when no one seems to be listening.

Rebels read the riot act not because people are rowdy, but because they are complacent. There are times we may need to read the riot act to wake people up to the need for change and to explain that management’s refusal to consider alternatives is in fact neglect and is putting the organization at risk.

If an organization has a transparent corporate culture, like Steve’s, you are more likely to be able to read the riot act as a way to try to create positive change. Reading the riot act indicates that you care about your organization. You want to help the organization to change and be a part of the change.

A good rebel riot act describes what’s at stake and offers a high-level plan to get from today’s pain to tomorrow’s outcomes. Unlike the “what’s at stake” communications approach during controversy, the riot act has a harder bite, a forceful tone, an extremely thorough plan, and a specific call to action. It should include:

We’ve mentioned this before when talking about the BBBs and it bears repeating: never attack people, use hurtful or rude language, or belittle them. Personal attacks cut the deepest and are the hardest to recover from. Go after issues, not people.

Try to understand what it’s like to be the person (or group) you’re angry with. What are they trying to protect? What makes them uncomfortable? What are they afraid of? How people talk about something conveys more information than the words themselves. Listen for the emotion beneath the words. This empathy will help neutralize your anger and help you see more clearly.

Consider the source of your anger a new piece of data to examine. There’s something to be understood in why you are angry. Try to observe the real issues. This calms down the negative anger and prevents you from lashing out. You’ll glean valuable insights by taking this approach, and you’ll earn credibility by showing people that they can express ideas without anyone dismissing them or biting their heads off.

When we’re angry, we often believe we’re right and they’re wrong. This belief shuts down dialogue. Everyone’s views are valid. (Unless some excellent research proves otherwise. If that’s the case, show them the data and get onto objective territory as fast as you can.) “Your views are valid. It is risky to change a process that’s been in place for years. Similarly, my views are valid too. We face other types of risks if we don’t change this process.” If you acknowledge others’ views, they are more likely to appreciate yours. This sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t, especially with BBBs. It’s still an approach worth trying.

Disarm the situation by acknowledging that tensions are high and disagreements are real. Here are some tactics:

These questions recognize the tension and offer an active approach to finding ways to address them. Often people suppress their anger, appearing passive while inside the frustration continues to build, increasing the chances of a harmful emotional outburst when you least expect it.

Impose a 24-hour no-email, no furious phone call quarantine on yourself. Take a walk or get out of the office. If you’re pressed by the other person to respond, say, “I have to reflect on this before being able to respond in a helpful way.”

Don’t think; write. Writing while angry cools you down while capturing potentially valuable ideas. Consider these prompts:

Lastly, accept that anger will always be present and powerful for us. Sometimes we don’t realize how much we’re invested and are unprepared for the anger that surges within us when things go wrong. We care too much about too much. The secret is being aware of the paradox of anger. It can give power and it can derail it. Use the power, and find ways to stop yourself from doing and saying things that derail your credibility.

As we’ve said, rebels tend to see possibilities and move ahead faster than most people at work. Helping others see new ways always takes longer than we think it should, and more people, processes, and task forces will try to block us along the way than we ever could envision. Persistence and purposeful patience helps; lashing out and biting their heads off doesn’t.