
Platform as a Service team takes even-handed approach to meetings - idlemind
https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2016/10/07/platform-as-a-service-team-takes-even-handed-approach-to-meetings/
======
gjvc
"In my experience, people don’t dominate a conversation or interrupt others
because they are unkind or power-hungry."

Suggests the author needs more experience of the workplace.

~~~
dogma1138
I've encountered an environment where they used something similar it was
ridiculous.

It turns passive aggressiveness to 11, there will always be rude people or
people with poor conversations skills.

However they are usually toned down because there is a limit to how much you
can interrupt someone before people tell you off, especially if there is a
line manager or a supervisor present.

Now you get stuck with some douche constantly using the disagree sign to your
face, and worse it can be maintained throughout your entire speech forcing you
to yield or tell them to sod off which means you lose.

It also doesn't really help new or shy team members if they don't want to
express an opinion they won't regardless if it's verbal or smoke signals.

Improving meetings can easily be done by having a meeting captain and a clear
agenda.

------
wollstonecraft
Historical note:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement_hand_signals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement_hand_signals)

~~~
sjellis
Yeah, I think that a key point here is that it is a way of keeping meetings on
track with larger groups. Once you have a bunch of people who have strong
opinions about the current topic of discussion, then you will get times when
multiple people want to express themselves at the same time.

The person running the meeting may then have to step in and act as traffic
cop, but they can only be reactive, after people start talking over each other
or whatever. It can take a combination of a good chair and mutual goodwill to
sort out the communication traffic jam. It's also rough on the people who
aren't assertive, as the article says.

------
aisofteng
I find mechanisms like this to be silly and childish. We're all adults; part
of life is learning how to communicate and how to be heard - more generally,
how to function in a group. If you haven't figured out how to function
properly to the point that you need a system of hand signals in meetings, then
it is worth it to look at why your development has been stunted, perhaps with
a therapist.

Similarly to that other commenter who didn't give a reason, I would also
immediately start looking for work if my workplace implemented this.

------
bumblebeard
I would probably start looking for somewhere else to work if I had to use
special hand signals during meetings.

~~~
lucb1e
Explanation for downvote: it doesn't contribute to the thread at all. You
could have mentioned why you object to using hand signals.

------
Deepfried
The hand signal for point of order is very similar to BSL for vagina. I'm not
sure they consulted any Deaf people.

~~~
Normal_gaussian
This is what I was thinking[0]. There are loads of really expressive BSL signs
that are more than appropriate for this kind of discussion. This is
unsurprising as deaf people have group conversations too! As a note for those
without experience of BSL, the signs are often dynamic and where
consensus/voting is being expressed you usually hold the last part of the
sign.

The occupy signs are deliberately chosen to be readable from really great
distances and not being part of a larger signing system they are hard to
expand upon.

[0] [http://www.signbsl.com/sign/vagina](http://www.signbsl.com/sign/vagina)
[1] [http://www.signbsl.com/sign/agree](http://www.signbsl.com/sign/agree) [2]
[http://www.signbsl.com/sign/disagree](http://www.signbsl.com/sign/disagree)

~~~
Terretta
What an oddly helpful but unhelpful site.

Hiding the symbols behind videos means I can't see what the symbol is as the
people haven't made it yet, unless I play the video.

Couldn't they have at least one sketch or marked up jpeg showing the symbol or
gesture?

Weird.

~~~
Normal_gaussian
It's made completely by contributors in their own time.

It's also much harder to create a sketch than simply record yourself signing.

And sketched signs are pretty much useless for everything except finger
spelling

------
cs02rm0
The GDS have done some great work. Nice to get a gentle reminder that they're
still public sector crazies once in a while. ;)

------
tomjen3
Personally I think they might be more useful as a secondary bandwidth channel:
you can now see, while you speak, if the majority needs the point clarified.

------
transitorykris
The Lean Coffee hand signals includes a couple others that aren't in this blog
post.

[http://www.lovelifepractice.com/practice/using-hand-
signals-...](http://www.lovelifepractice.com/practice/using-hand-signals-for-
better-meetings/)

Another hand signal I've used in large groups is pointing at a person who has
a hand up (wants to say something). It's a useful signal to the person
speaking and can avoid people stepping on each other to speak next.

~~~
peteretep
Ironically I've used exactly this to generally shut down interrupters I didn't
want. Point at them when you can see they're about to interrupt and then keep
talking. Indefinitely.

------
Cozumel
Sounds like an episode of The Office!

------
MaxLeiter
Is there a reason they don't use something like parliamentary procedure?

~~~
Normal_gaussian
Likely it is too formal, extremely cumbersome, and implies everybody has a
vote.

When I am talking to a team I want to know what they think, ideally as
immediately as possible (which visual clues allow) but don't want to have to
preplan anything.

~~~
wtbob
Parliamentary procedure really isn't cumbersome; you can use as much or as
little of it as you need. It's well-designed for organisations seeking to have
discussion and reach decisions, even when the group may be ultimately unable
to come to unanimity.

And on a team, _doesn 't_ everyone have a vote?

~~~
Normal_gaussian
> And on a team, doesn't everyone have a vote?

No.

It would largely depend on the structure of the team as to what is optimal,
however it is obvious that even though the h/w specialist should be involved
in the discussion of the DB system we use on the device it is the data
specialist who makes the decision.

Many decisions have many more involed parties than decisionmakers for good
reason.

~~~
wtbob
Good point. Well, FWIW parliamentary procedure can still handle non-voting
parties, e.g. the non-voting representatives of U.S. territories in the U.S.
Congress.

------
joezydeco
Love the bunny rabbit signal for "disagree". Very cute.

~~~
vacri
It's weird that they chose the English-speaking-world's hand gesture for
"stop" as their "agree", especially when there's already "thumbs up" and "ok"
out there.

~~~
PaulRobinson
The thumbs up gesture is an offensive gesture to Muslim cultures. Equivalent
to the middle finger in US culture.

The "OK" circle with thumb and finger is offensive in Southern European
countries (e.g. Greece), also somewhere around the same level of offence as
the middle finger.

GDS might be part of the British civil service, but the UK is still a
multicultural society with workers from all over the World here, including I
believe, GDS. That might change in the next two years, but right now, it's who
we are (and I personally hope it's who we remain in years to come).

It's not "political correctness gone mad" to choose a hand signal that isn't
offensive over one that a third of the room might find offensive. It's just
polite.

~~~
legostormtroopr
No body said "political correctness gone mad", you are projecting.

What was said was "It's weird that they chose the English-speaking-world's
hand gesture for "stop" as their "agree"" \- which it is, I see two hands palm
up at me and I see "stop".

------
sgt101
No evidence, no credit!

