It was a typical executive staff meeting. Six tired-looking VPs had dragged themselves out of their homes for an early morning meeting to face Jeff, the CEO known as "The Hanging Judge." Jeff had a habit of taking down anyone gutsy enough to share bad news. And he was merciless.

This morning the meeting opened as usual with Jeff rambling through the forecast. Next on the agenda was a call for status reports. All heads around the table dropped. But Jeff was not to be deterred. After scouring the mix of gray, black and brown heads, Jeff´s eyes settled on Greg´s shiny top.

"Greg!" he shouted, as if to wake him from the coma-like state from which he had emerged only a couple of hours earlier.

Reluctantly, Greg began his report that included an update on the new machine that after three months was still inoperable. Immediately, Eric, the CFO, stood up. Retrieving a gun from his jacket, he turned to Greg and fired three shots. Greg´s face distorted as he clutched his chest and toppled to the floor. The rest of the group, eyes and mouths wide, sat motionless as if in a trance.

A few seconds passed and Greg stood up. The others stared at him in disbelief. Then it hit them. It was a joke! Almost as if on cue they all burst into laughter. That is, all except Jeff, who sat scratching his head totally confused.

Finally, Eric explained that the event had been staged to make a point. The CEO had a habit of "shooting the messenger." And despite their efforts to communicate how much of a problem it was, Jeff didn´t seem to get it. This little skit arranged by Greg and Eric was an attempt to enlighten Jeff once-and-for-all about how it really felt to experience Jeff´s vengeful reaction to bad news.

Needless to say, this time Jeff got the point.

Unfortunately, not everyone gets the point like Jeff. Another CEO was so reactive to bad news that prior to a presentation, I was told to remove all references to the company´s declining stock price and rising operating costs. This high-control CEO had created a situation where he made 100% of the decisions with only half of the information, which, because his staff was afraid to tell him the truth, happened to be good news only. Of course, he knew about the stock price and cost issues. But he preferred to pretend they didn´t exist and made it clear he wanted everyone else to play the same game.

CEOs and other leaders can also be frustrated at the lack of open and authentic deliberations by their staff. A CEO once told me how frustrated he was that when he happened to make a casual remark about something, people jumped all over themselves to make it happen as if it was a demand. And in meetings, it was difficult to get people to speak up and tell him what was on their minds. They all waited to see what he would say and nod in agreement.

The CEO wanted his staff to step up and accept a higher level of commitment for the business and become part of the decision making process instead of bobbing their heads up and down with everything he said. But, most of the time, they just played it safe and let the CEO take all the responsibility.

One new general manager had come from a similar business culture where people avoided responsibility and deferred to the hierarchy for decisions. It was not only stifling, but also inefficient and costly to the business. He wanted something different in his new organization. He wanted an environment of spirited dialogue and debate where people felt inclined to make decisions and try new things. So he met regularly with groups of core employees and managers and gave them work problems to solve. When they turned to him for his opinion, he let them know it was their problem to sort out. He just watched the process and challenged their conclusions so they would keep working out the wrinkles.

It didn´t take long for employees in the plant to lose their fear of giving opinions or discussing what wasn´t working. All the leader had to do was create the expectation that others, not the leader, were responsible for figuring out what needed to be done, and encourage discussion of the negative as well as the positive.

Then came the tough part. The leader had to respect and support their efforts, which he did. His managers and core workers began to look for ways to solve problems or improve work processes by challenging obsolete practices and sharing ideas in spirited collaborations.

This GM, without some dramatic display like a faked murder, figured out that you have to encourage, not discourage, deliberations if you want people to become part of the solution.

Trying it on for fit: Here are a few ways to evoke opinions and generate lively discussions of decision alternatives:

• Give people a meaningful workplace problem to solve and let them know you expect them to find an answer.
• Before stating your opinion, present the problem and ask others what they would do.
• Argue against your opinion and press for alternatives.
• Set up debates to argue various alternatives. Have debaters argue the position opposing their own.
• Ask "what if" to challenge decisions and conventional thinking.
• Conduct a "gains and losses" exercise where everyone lists what they gain and lose from each alternative.
• Remain silent during discussions and ask for a recommendation from the group.
• Ask for what´s not working, or what could go wrong, as well as what is working. Use the information as a means of solving rather than blaming.

Send an e-mail and let me know what you learn from your experiences.  I would love to hear from you!

Kevin Herring is co-author of Practical Guide for Internal Consultants, and President of Ascent Management Consulting.  Ascent specializes in creating business solutions through effective management, workplace cultures and organization systems.

Kevin can be reached at 520-742-7300, kevinh@ascentmgt.com or www.ascentmgt.com.

©2006 Ascent Management Consulting, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.