5 Biases Sabotaging Your Hybrid Meetings

A year ago, most of us with office jobs were virtual all the time. And as much as that may have felt disconnected, tiring, or unsatisfying, at least we were all in the same boat.

Well, that ship has sailed for many of us. As our workplaces return to the next normal, we must embrace working in mixed teams and groups. A recent Global Workforce Survey predicts that 98% of meetings will include at least one participant remotely. This makes facilitating meetings more challenging. When all participants are in the same room or all participants are participating remotely, facilitating a meeting can be easier and more straightforward. However, if you're running a mixed meeting where some participants are participating remotely while others are physically present, you'll need additional strategies to keep everyone engaged and the meeting on track.

An important strategy is to recognize and control for the biases that can derail a hybrid meeting. (Do you think you're not biased? You're probably subject to what Yale psychologist David Armor calls the "illusion of objectivity": We think of ourselves as more objective, fairer, insightful, and less biased than we actually are.)

Bias affects how we view people and situations, how we behave and respond to those people and situations, what we pay attention to and what we ignore, and much more. In hybrid meetings, these biases can make some people feel more or less included, some topics seem more or less important than they deserve, and they can set the tone for how well or poorly this new world of work turns out becomes.

Below are five biases you should check for yourself before your next internal or external hybrid meeting and what you can do about them:

PROXIMITY BIAS

Here we show a preference for those who are physically close to us. In a hybrid meeting, this may mean that when you attend live in-person, you subconsciously prefer those who are there in person like you, as opposed to those who attend via video. You might approach them more often, answer their questions more quickly, or engage in other unconscious behaviors that make your group feel like the "in group" while the other is the "out group."

How to mitigate this: Even if you can't change your subconscious preference for those who are physically closer to you, you can bring more people into that group by actively looking for other things you have in common with them. So focus on the goals, values, experiences, and preferences you share with the other group, rather than viewing your meeting participants as "in the room" or "virtual." As social psychologist Heidi Grant and neuroscientist David Rock write, "This causes the brain to recategorize these people, creating a more level playing field." You should also remind yourself - and the group - that everyone has something meaningful to contribute, regardless of location.

CONVENIENCE PREJUDICE

We often prefer to decide and act quickly rather than taking the time to gain greater clarity and understanding. In a mixed meeting, this may mean making decisions based on the views of those who can communicate more quickly and easily (this may be the people in the room, rather than those trying to raise their hand or virtually interrupt) . Convenience bias also occurs when participants are in a hurry or feel cognitively exhausted—both hallmarks of many meetings.

How you can mitigate this: If there are critical factors to consider before making an important decision, you should use the time before the meeting for asynchronous work. Send out the materials before the meeting and let participants know that they need to take time to review the materials so that their contributions can be considered. Emphasize this positively by not taking the time to cover the material in the meeting - this sends the message that it should have been covered in advance.

In the meeting, let participants know if something needs to be carefully considered,  Have 10 minutes to write down your thoughts and questions before opening the discussion. This slows down the process for everyone and distributes contributions evenly. Take a break during the session to reduce cognitive overload.

PROXIMITY COMMUNICATION DISTORTION

Have you ever been in a meeting and thought to yourself, "I can predict what Avi will say. We've been working together for a decade!" Then you already know this bias. We tend to overestimate the effectiveness of our communication when dealing with someone we think we know. We assume that people close to us will easily understand what we mean, while we explain or listen more carefully when communicating with strangers.

For a mixed session, this can mean that we often start from a shared perspective with people we are physically and/or emotionally close to. As a result, we listen to them less and don't ask deeper, clarifying questions because we "already know" what they think.

How to mitigate this: Commit to really listening, especially to colleagues whose answers and opinions you think you can predict. Practice the art of "looping" to make sure you truly understand the other person rather than taking on their message. This can sound like this: "Avi, it sounds like you're saying that we should do more stakeholder surveys before we move forward, is that correct?" And then pay attention to Avi's answer.

It's not only helpful for Avi to feel heard and validated, but it's also helpful for your relationship when you show him that you care enough to listen to him and learn something new about him. It's also helpful for the rest of the group to mitigate each other's biases since you and Avi have known each other for so long.

BIKE SHEDDING EFFECT

This is the tendency of groups and teams to pay disproportionate attention to trivial questions (e.g. "What color should we paint the bike shed?") rather than addressing challenging, complex and important questions (e.g. E.g. "How do we get people to cycle to work to reduce carbon emissions?"). Because it is difficult to lead and participate in hybrid meetings, our desire to include everyone can lead us to solicit more opinions on simple topics than we need to or should, and postpone or avoid those that are meaningful and complex require debate. This is a type of procrastination that can make hybrid sessions less productive and more frustrating.

How to mitigate this: Create an agenda that cannot be put off. The agenda for your meeting should include the specific topics to be discussed, the questions to be addressed and the decisions to be made, as well as the time allotted for each section. This agenda should be distributed before the meeting and you should ask that any changes be proposed before the meeting. (This also reduces agenda jockeying during the meeting, which can take valuable time and energy away from meeting work.)

If the discussion during the meeting shifts to a topic that is not on the agenda, you should consider moving it to either a "short-term parking" (i.e. you will return to it in today's meeting or shortly after) or a "long-term parking" ( where you will take up the topic again later or in a subsequent meeting).

CONFIRMATION BIAS

Hybrid meetings stink, right? If you think so, you're not alone - and maybe you've just activated your confirmation bias. This is our tendency to seek out, interpret, and prefer information that confirms or supports what we already believe. In a hybrid meeting, this can show up when, for example, we believe that “virtual participants are less engaged.”

Once we have this belief, we look for evidence that confirms it, e.g. B. when we see someone with their video turned off. This can then lead to the “Golem Effect,” where our low expectations of participation or performance actually result in low participation or performance. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

How to mitigate this: Prove you are wrong. Actively seek out information that is counterintuitive, contradictory, or outside your comfort zone, and be willing to consider new evidence. And you don't have to do this alone. Invite others to join you. For example, host a group discussion on this topic: "Virtual participants can be more engaged than those present in the room. How is this?" See what answers emerge and conduct an experiment looking for evidence that confirms that these perspectives can also be true.

Embracing the complexities of hybrid work demands vigilance against biases. IceHrm's comprehensive solutions empower teams to foster inclusivity and drive meaningful collaboration in every meeting.