Decisions are scheduled at times convenient to the sponsor, within the rules and with proper notice, so the sponsor's supporters are present and an opponent who cannot attend must make their case on paper.
Borderline: whether this move is justified depends on the situation, and only the person in it can judge.
An example
Every January the vice president of sales at a family-owned beverage distributor spent a week at the national trade show. That year the pricing committee's regular February date fell during trade-show week, and the finance director, who chaired the committee, declined to move it. She had a proposal to cut the volume discounts sales used to hold its largest restaurant accounts, and three of the five members supported it. She sent the agenda and the full proposal three weeks ahead, as the bylaws required, and invited the vice president to submit written comments or send a deputy with speaking rights. His four-page response was read into the minutes. The committee approved the cut four to one, his deputy voting against. When he raised it with the chief executive, he was told the committee had met on its published date.
Why it works
Timing changes who is in the room, and who is in the room changes the outcome. A decision taken with the sponsor's supporters present looks better, carrying the weight of a committee vote, and comes easier, with less debate. An opponent who must argue on paper loses the force of a live case, so their position is worth less, and contesting a properly noticed decision afterward costs them, since it reads as an attack on the process. It needs control of the calendar within the rules, proper notice, and a forum that does not defer decisions for absent members.
The thinking behind it
Solomon E. Asch Asch's Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments (1951) found that when one other person in the group gave the correct answer, conformity to a unanimous majority fell sharply. A meeting held without the main opponent loses the one voice most likely to break the room's agreement, and the remaining members find it easier to vote with the sponsor. That is why an absent member's deputy or written case matters, and why bylaws that defer contested items protect dissent.
When it fits
Chairs and sponsors who control a committee's calendar within its bylaws, and who have the votes when the committee meets on its regular date, are placed to do this. You need rules you are following to the letter, and an agenda strong enough to survive the absent member's written case.
How to use it well
Use the calendar you are entitled to set, and follow the notice rules exactly.
- Send the agenda and the full proposal on time to every member, including the one who will be away.
- Offer the absent member written comments, a deputy, or a call-in, whatever the rules allow.
- Read their submission into the minutes in full.
- Decline to move the meeting if you are not required to, and say why.
Record the vote as it happened. A clean procedural record is what holds the decision when someone challenges it.
What it costs and where it backfires
Absent members feel ambushed whatever the notice said, and the relationship may not recover. A pattern of decisions landing in the same person's absence will be noticed, and the next chair may do the same to you. The line is the record: moving a meeting into a known absence without proper notice, withholding the agenda, or turning away a deputy entitled to sit excludes someone from a decision they were owed, and the calendar history will show it.
When it is used on you
Scheduled around, send your known absences to the chair in advance and ask that contested items wait, name a deputy with standing, and submit a full written case. Push for bylaws that defer contested items when an affected member cannot attend.