John is the president of the student council. He had called for a meeting to finalise the details of a upcoming bazaar in school and told his committee that the meeting will only last from 7pm to 9pm. However till 10pm, the meeting still had not end. Jane had promised her parents she will be home by 10pm as her parents were unhappy that she had been returning home late for the past few weeks. Knowing that she was already late, she requested John to let her leave first. John did not accede to Jane’s request, reasoning that the meeting was important and everyone should be present. Jane was annoyed with his decision. When the meeting finally ended at 10.30pm, Jane was the first one to leave the room and on her way out, she slammed the door shut. Jane was clearly showing her displeasure to John. John was also infuriated by the attitude that Jane shown.
After this incident, the relationship between John and Jane became tense. For the subsequent meetings, there was not much said between the two. The other committee members are concerned that if this situation continues, meetings will be even less efficient. They tried to persuade them individually to apologize but both John and Jane were stubborn and refuse to budge.
How could John and Jane better handle the situation and possibly avoid the conflict?
After this incident, the relationship between John and Jane became tense. For the subsequent meetings, there was not much said between the two. The other committee members are concerned that if this situation continues, meetings will be even less efficient. They tried to persuade them individually to apologize but both John and Jane were stubborn and refuse to budge.
How could John and Jane better handle the situation and possibly avoid the conflict?
4 comments:
I believe that John should have been more tactful in explaining that it was an important meeting and hope that Jane could stay until the meeting ended. Otherwise advise her to read up the minutes of the meeting as soon as she could. On Jane’s part, she could have explained to John her parent’s displeasure at her staying out too late and sought his understanding in allowing her to leave first. Furthermore, Jane could have promised John to read the meeting minutes and call him for clarification should there be further doubts. I think that although John did not accede to Jane’s request, Jane could have kept her temper in check and not vent it out openly by slamming the door shut.
Should I be one of the members of the committee, I would probably advise them to step into each other’s shoes and think of the bigger picture-to serve the student population as a united team.
Ho Teck
This is a situation that I've encountered many times before, and I feel that is no hard and fast rule on how either party should behave. I believe it is a matter of compromise on both parties. Let’s start with John.
As a leader, I think John could have been more understanding of Jane's situation. If she had wanted to leave before 9pm for the same reason, then he has a right to respond the way he did (since he did mention that the meeting would be from 7-9pm). However, as the meeting had already overrun by an hour, he could have appealed to her that she stay as the meeting was important. If she decides not to, he could impose upon her to keep herself updated with what happened after she left.
As for Jane, I feel that she should not have shown her annoyance publicly as this will create an uncomfortable working environment for the committee. She could have explained the situation with her parents to John earlier. They could then schedule meeting times at earlier hours so as not to last late into the night.
If I were part of this committee, I would bring up the matter in the meeting to talk it out. The situation has got to a point where it is affecting everyone, not just John and Jane. If the issue is not addressed it could eventually blow up and affect everyone even more.
I agree with Mei Ling that John, as a leader, should be more understanding. Since the meeting was initially scheduled from 7 pm to 9 pm and had extended by one hour, John should accept Jane's explanation and respect her decision to leave before the meeting ends. He could remind Jane to update herself on the final outcomes of the meeting.
I believe Jane should have manage her anger more constructively and not express her annoyance in front of everyone. This will create tensions in the working relationship in the committee and affect future cooperation.
Frankly speaking, I will leave exactly at 9 pm and not wait for the additional one hour if I am Jane and do not wish to break the promise to my parents. Before I leave, I would pass a message to John, giving my explanation and apology for leaving early. On the following day, I would update myself on the meeting details and apologise to John in face again. Have I, as Jane, handle the situation based on sound EQ principles?
Hi Qiyuan, firstly I believe that John should apologize to everyone for ending the meeting late as they have been informed that it would end at 9pm. As the chairperson, he should have paid more attention to the time and ended the meeting promptly or even arranged for another meeting. John should have shown more understanding for Jane and try to see things from her point of view. In addition, he should approach Jane and talk privately about this incident since it is affecting their working relationship.
On the other hand, though Jane had been nice enough to stay for an additional hour and asked for John’s permission before leaving early, she should not have shown her displeasure by slamming the door. This only made the matter worse. Instead, she could approach John the next day and share her feelings about this incident.
For at team to work efficiently, everyone has to put their differences aside. And that requires effort from both the leader and the followers.
Jimmy
ES2007S Group 2
Post a Comment