Inspired by the other comments on this post, I wanted to share some reflections on identifying, confronting, challenging, and resolving power dynamics within your teams.

Identifying

Some types of power are easy to spot, either because their effects are obvious or we can feel when it’s being exercised. Identifying the types of power your team members have is best done using a power analysis tool, like this one by Just Associates that is widely known and used. I like to use the Powercube – more on that in a later post – to name the specific ways it manifests.

One of the reasons why teams need to confront power dynamics is when it’s being used disrespectfully, or abused. Identifying the type of ways it manifests is useful – who is involved, when do these dynamics show up, and how is a good starting point. In this example, you may see a lot of ‘power over’ others, or ‘power to’ control the type of projects you work on, the strategy used in your programme, etc.

As a very small and relatively banal example, several years ago, I noticed that in every team meeting, the men took up an inordinate amount of time to discuss their work. This left female colleagues very little space for their updates during weekly meetings where the aim was to catch up colleagues from other programmes on big events or share our highlights. This was a hard one for me to manage, especially given my job title and mid-level position within the team. But I could tell instantly that this was an unfair use of power because all the women were made to feel uncomfortable, and as if they shouldn’t say anything about being given very little time to speak.

Confronting

The most effective way to confront this type of relationship is finding the right strategy for the way the power dynamics play out. That means if something comes up in a meeting, it’s sometimes appropriate to discuss it in a large group setting right there, especially if someone has behaved in an incendiary way. But sometimes, speaking to the person immediately after the meeting is a lot more effective. Here, getting clear about what’s happening, to whom, why, when, etc can help you to think through the best way to address it.

It’s of course always easier to confront an individual or a group of people rather than an institutional policy like a gender pay gap, so in this article I’m looking only at personal group dynamics.

In the example above, I tried speaking to a few of the men in the office whom I knew were at least aware that there was a power dynamic at play. Like with many foundations, most of the leadership positions were held by men, not all of whom had the self awareness to realise this was an unfair distribution of power. There is always a lot at risk in terms of your career by addressing someone’s ego so I started with those I knew would respect me rather than dismiss the idea.

To their credit, one colleague did notice this at play once I discussed it with him, and remedied it by keeping his portion of the meeting to a few minutes.

Challenging

I realised my approach wasn’t working with everyone though, so I decided to speak directly to the problem. I got an app on my phone with two buttons, which counted the minutes taken up by men and women in meetings (at the time the app had only these two genders).

I put my phone on the desk face up, so everyone could see what I was doing. Yes, I was that person in the office. At the end of each meeting, I shared the number of minutes taken up by men and women on a whiteboard in the meeting room, and it stayed up there for a week until the next meeting.

Sometimes, your approach may need to be that confrontational, if you have tried a more diplomatic approach and are met with resistance. I always suggest people start from a place of understanding or empathy, leaving room for others’ lack of awareness about an issue, but the fact that generally, people in our sector have good intentions.

Sometimes if you’re lucky, pointing out that someone is always given the lead in a strategy design process and that you would like more of a say can help you. Sometimes it can to just the opposite, so you may need to get louder. When challenging, try to approach the issue with your suggestions of how it could be better. Your argument risks coming across as purely critical, rather than also focussed on a solution.

In this example, you may need to think about what a fairer approach to the strategy could be. If you don’t have a particular interest in getting involved but know that the current method isn’t working, get creative about who should have a say. Maybe partners should be consulted at the start rather than the middle or end, or speaking with your funders could add another set of ideas. Bring that suggestion to the conversation when you point out that a power dynamic is detrimentally affecting your work.

Resolving

Sadly, pointing out a power dynamic affecting your work and suggesting a solution won’t always mean it’s respected, and you may need to follow up to ensure that it’s resolved to everyone’s benefit. So before confronting this dynamic, think about what a successful outcome could look like, and how that would affect how your team works in the future. Maybe it means your strategy design takes a little longer, so you’d have to start earlier in the year. How would that affect the rest of your work, and your team’s work?

In my example, my approach sat badly with leadership who insisted I scrap the idea. I was facing other problems with that working environment so I had to drop my idea unfortunately. Instead, I used my time during those team meetings, during male colleagues’ monologues, to plan out my tasks for the week. However within my smaller team, we continued to use that software to make sure people at all levels felt they were given the space to share their perspectives equitably.

How about your teams? What’s worked for you and what hasn’t when it comes to team power dynamics? Are there certain types of power that come through more often than others?