In the book “Lean In,” there was a chapter titled Sit at the Table which evaluated a meeting situation that included both men and women where the women sat in chairs off to the side of the room instead of at the conference room table. Even after the author, Sheryl Sandberg, motioned them to move to the table, they remained in their seats to the side. The author suggested that their seating choice made them seem like spectators rather than participants. Their behavior to sit to the side of the room was surmised to be due to their gender and a related internal barrier that altered the women’s behavior.
This, indeed, could have been the case, but I’m not completely convinced. There have been times where I have intentionally sat at the head of the table and it had nothing to do with my gender, but my own agenda for the meeting. More specifically, I wanted to assert my leadership position with the intention of influencing the outcome of the meeting. More often than not, it’s worked.
Shortly after I read “Lean In,” I observed a very interesting situation that reminded me of that particular chapter. The meeting was being held in the company’s boardroom. The boardroom was impressive with a large mahogany table that seated approximately 50 people, video conferencing capabilities, a podium and a sweeping view of the city. Additionally, there was a couch area off to the side. The meeting included a diverse group of senior and executive management from all business units and support areas. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the strategy of a very important project that was well underway. We were at a key interception where we needed to determine how much money and human capital we were willing to commit and spend to ensure the success of the project. Obviously, we didn’t want to overspend, but if we missed the mark and the project failed for any reason (including underspending) the domino effect would have considerable negative impact on the stock price. It was high-stakes poker!
A member of executive management, Clark, who ran one of the company’s largest business units, entered the room just as it was beginning. There were still two seats available at the board room table, but he chose to sit in the couch area off to the side. The meeting got underway and a lively, even passionate, discussion ensued with participants often speaking over one another. Clark was quiet for about the first 30 minutes of the meeting, but eventually he piped into the discussion and gave his opinion. The room responded very interestingly when Clark spoke. Everyone physically searched for the voice. People physically turned in the chairs and craned their necks to see Clark speaking. No one spoke over Clark as he shared his opinion. I should mention he wasn’t the only member of executive management present so he wasn’t the highest ranking person there.
After the meeting, I approach Clark because I had to know why he chose to sit where he did, away from the table. Was he trying to be accommodating and polite to those who would enter after he did so they could have a seat at the table? Was he choosing to be a spectator? Was there some internal hurdle that made him chose the couch? And so I asked him why. His answer was fascinating! He said he sat there intentionally for effect so when he decided to share his opinion he wanted it to be different than the others. He wanted to cause people to physically seek out his voice. He believed a booming voice off to the side would have a more lasting impact than if he were at the table. He also wanted a different view to observe body language. From his perspective and for that meeting, sitting off to the side was a better vantage point to accomplish his goal; in this case, to be heard.
While I sometimes chose the head of the table for effect, he chose away from the table for effect. I’ve since added that possibility to my own “play book.” His answer also reminded me that I needed to be aware of cognitive biases when evaluating behaviors. I feel certain males and females decide where to sit in a meeting setting for a whole host of reasons and those reasons probably change from meeting to meeting based on a whole host of factors. Sitting off to the side doesn’t necessarily mean that is where a woman feels she is supposed to be; it could be exactly where she wants to be “waiting.”
Where do you sit in meeting?
youwaithere.com 