ABSTRACT
The meetings of a group of psychologists to which I consulted would often start with a discussion of their frustration at decisions not having been implemented. At one meeting, the main topic for a considerable time was the previous meeting, whether it had been a good meeting or a bad meeting – it being entirely unclear what this meant. When I pointed this out, there followed a lengthy debate about the relative merits of various chairs, seating arrangements, and, finally, rooms in which to hold the meeting. Various improved ways of organising the meeting were proposed, but no decision was reached. I suggested there was a fear of discussing matters of real concern to the members present, perhaps a fear of conflict. At this point it emerged that there was indeed considerable controversy about a proposed appointment, some favouring one method, others another. Eventually a decision was almost reached, only to be resisted on the grounds that one significant member of the team was absent.
