Who am I answering to in team meetings?

[phd_angel]

This often happens in team conversations: players react differently to me (some happy, some unhappy) and I have to pick a positive or negative answer.  Whom I'm answering to: the happy or unhappy ones? Should I say the meeting below was positive?... Please explain. Thanks.

Edited May 17, 2023 by phd_angel

[santy001]

I do see the point that its not clearly presented in any way. It's something I could very much expect would not read well to someone who isn't a native speaker of English. How well it holds up into translations in other languages, I'm not knowledgeable enough to know.

But somehow, just through the context its completely understandable to me which one is referring to which. The first three cater to the negative/orange reactions, the last one caters to positive/green reactions.

[Wavelberry]

39 minutes ago, santy001 said:

I do see the point that its not clearly presented in any way. It's something I could very much expect would not read well to someone who isn't a native speaker of English. How well it holds up into translations in other languages, I'm not knowledgeable enough to know.

But somehow, just through the context its completely understandable to me which one is referring to which. The first three cater to the negative/orange reactions, the last one caters to positive/green reactions.

Disagree with that as the second from the right is directly addressing the speaker contextually is it not?

[santy001]

Why would a player who's satisfied with what has been said be told they need to knuckle down and get on with things?

It reads to me as Left to Right:

1: I'm not winning you around with what I'm saying, but I'll fix it by bringing in some players.

2: I'm not winning you around with what I'm saying, but I'll fix it by changing tactics.

3: I'm sorry you don't like what I'm saying, but it's only going to get better if you just crack on with it. That includes those who are unhappy.

4: Glad to have convinced you, good chat.

[herne79]

26 minutes ago, Wavelberry said:

Disagree with that as the second from the right is directly addressing the speaker contextually is it not?

 

22 minutes ago, santy001 said:

Why would a player who's satisfied with what has been said be told they need to knuckle down and get on with things?

It reads to me as Left to Right:

1: I'm not winning you around with what I'm saying, but I'll fix it by bringing in some players.

2: I'm not winning you around with what I'm saying, but I'll fix it by changing tactics.

3: I'm sorry you don't like what I'm saying, but it's only going to get better if you just crack on with it. That includes those who are unhappy.

4: Glad to have convinced you, good chat.

And therein lies the issue.  It’s open to interpretation and/or poorly written which in turn leads to a lack of confidence in the interaction module.

Wavelberry is correct - it can be interpreted as directly addressing the speaker because it includes the line “and that includes you”.  But Santy is also correct because why would we say something like that to such a player?  Then again, from purely reading that response 2nd from right, that is in no way an “apology” even though it is labelled as such.

I’m British and I struggle with interpreting many responses.  I can only empathise with someone who is not a native English speaker trying to navigate their way through this.

To answer the OP - despite 3 of the 4 players being either disappointed or let down, I’d pick the “Positive” response, even though it’s pretty weird telling such let down players that it’s been productive.

[sdx15]

Are you not responding to everyone in a meeting with multiple players present? Clicking the promise responses will, if I'm not mistaken, create a promise made to all 4 players present, not just to the 3 ones that disagreed with you. And clicking the right responses will further worsen the morale of the unhappy three which is why I hate these interactions as you cannot address different responses simultaneously.

[rristola]

5 hours ago, phd_angel said:

...Whom I'm answering to: the happy or unhappy ones? Should I say the meeting below was positive?

I don't know how these conversations are built, or how those 'reactions to answer' probabilities are defined, but this is how I see this situation. And, BTW, I'm not native English speaker.

 

First, this Satisfied player. Previous answers have made him confident - you are doing your best. I think that he wont get upset - unless you tell him that you are going to throw him out of team! He might not agree on something, but he stays at least content.

 

These three upset team "leaders". The biggest problem is that disappointment (or even being furious) won't spread into the whole team. Here I would suggest you to use that PROS and CONS method.

- Positive answer - this sounds to me like just saying "Yes, I know."  IMO here lies big possibility that these three players get even furious - and the next question would be "Are you not gonna do anythng?" It is like you wouldn't care...

  There is, of course, some chance that these players understand that you have no means to do more.

- Apologize - I think chances are about 50-50. Either thay agree, that everybody must do things better, or... they get furious and answer "Do you think that we haven't done our best!"

- Two other are Promises - if you use either of them, you have to be ready to act accordingly.

    - Buying new player - chances are 50-50. If everyone in team knows that there is a problem with one position, then getting a new player might be a good decision. But, if one of those three plays that position, then... who knows.

      It is also possible that a new player gets some other players annoyed. Might not be that bad, because these three are (most likely) those most important (= influential) players in your team.

      Also, do you have the money?

    - Change in tactics - I think this is the best choice. But only if they "buy" the idea. This way you are telling them it's your fault, because it's about tactics. This could work, if you can find any weak spots in your tactic. Anyway, promise should be easy to keep.

      There is also a possibility that those players think that this is just too little or that it won't work.

 

So, you are answering to them all (and to all players in your team). All players will be influenced by your decision.

And, as I wrote, that Satisfied player is and will be OK.

 

This meeting positive? These players came to see you, because they think your team has a major problem. Problem won't go away just like that.

If you can give an answer, which gives some hope for these players and they can keep going on, then you have a positive result.

If these and maybe more players lose their hope, then you're doomed.

 

BTW, I have had situations, where players in a team doomed to relegation, have after a positive answer "We are doing OK." gone mad. Over-positive answer can have "negative" results, too.

 

When you have made your decision, let us know what happened.

[Jonthedon26]

On 13/05/2023 at 11:26, sdx15 said:

Are you not responding to everyone in a meeting with multiple players present? Clicking the promise responses will, if I'm not mistaken, create a promise made to all 4 players present, not just to the 3 ones that disagreed with you. And clicking the right responses will further worsen the morale of the unhappy three which is why I hate these interactions as you cannot address different responses simultaneously.

This is what I always thought it was.

[Sunstrikuuu]

3 hours ago, Jonthedon26 said:

This is what I always thought it was.

Click any of the buttons and it'll show the morale changes for all of the players, so I don't see how any of the answers are individually addressed.  

[Mst82]

I absolutely dread these situations as more often than not, they end up completely ruining morale. Whether that be everyone crying, or the minority then disrupting the atmosphere thereafter.

When I’m advised to hold a meeting re: title chances etc. I simply don’t do it. There’s always one who thinks I’ve just slagged his family off rather than telling him we’ve got a chance to win the league here.

[MrCell0phane]

Worst thing I've done in my save is accidentally initiating a team meeting.

In fact, the only success I've ever had in a team meeting was at the end of the season saying "we are shooting for the playoffs. Enjoy your vacation, I'm not promising anything else right now."

Anything else upsets the apple cart.