Found this question posed by Tamica Sears on her "Thursday Thoughts with Tamica!" interesting. Having been in lots of challenging work environments, it's proven to be a very effective approach.
I've found that it's useful to maintain two perspectives at the same time. One objective overview monitor (OOM). One activity-oriented participant (AOP). Your OOM is always observing the situation and maintaining some sense of order, but not engaging in the fray. The AOP is dealing with the details, but under the command of the OOM, not the dysfunction or chaos in the room.
An example. Your boss barges in yelling about something being late. Your OOM takes notice, digests the what the boss is trying to communicate, and directs the AOP how to respond in a way that moves the process forward without exacerbating the already problematic situation.
To make this work, it requires controlling your emotions. That doesn't mean that the OOM won't decide the best course of action is for the AOP to yell back at the boss. That may be what the OOM decides is the best way to communicate effectively in that situation with that boss. Or maybe, not say anything at all and let the boss burn off some steam.
Maybe you're in a room by yourself with lots on your table. You still let the OOM digest the situation and decide what work to assign to the AOP at any given moment.
Can't recommend it for everyone, but it's worked well for me!
I help tech companies hire tech talent
4moThank you for initiating this, Tamica! How does Sears Coaching approach leadership development differently?