How to Bring an Organization’s Unspeakable Problems to Light: Elephants, Dead Fish, and Vomiting

Key Concept

If there’s a smell of rotten fish in the office but no one says anything, the problem isn’t just the smell itself. The bigger problem is the atmosphere where everyone knows about it but remains silent.

Many leaders say, “If there’s a problem, feel free to speak up anytime.” However, from the team members’ perspective, they may hesitate to speak up for fear that the moment they do, they’ll be seen as a complainer, a troublemaker, or someone who takes the blame. Therefore, to foster a culture of open communication within an organization, simply declaring that “it’s okay to speak up” isn’t enough. You must work together to design an environment where people know what to say and how to say it, and where they feel confident that speaking up won’t result in negative consequences.

The “Elephant, Dead Fish, and Vomit” framework—popularized by Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia—is useful for addressing this issue. The core of this framework is to break down vague “problems” into smaller categories and ask questions tailored to each category.

Three Categories: Elephants, Dead Fish, and Vomit

1. The Elephant: The Problem Everyone Sees but Doesn’t Talk About

The “elephant in the room” refers to a problem that’s too big to ignore, yet no one mentions it. In an organization, it manifests in the following ways:

• Project deadlines are unrealistic, yet no one objects.
• Everyone knows the decision-maker is wrong, but they remain silent during meetings.
• Conflict between specific teams is hurting performance, yet it isn’t raised as an official agenda item.
• Customer complaints, quality risks, and employee burnout are evident, but everyone just says, “It’s fine.”

The elephant is usually an ongoing risk. If left unaddressed, the costs will escalate later, and team members may become accustomed to “learned silence,” believing that “nothing will change even if we speak up.”

2. Dead Fish: Problems You Thought Were Over, But Are Still Stinking Up the Place

A “dead fish” is a problem that appears to be a thing of the past but has not been properly resolved. Examples include the following:

• Moving directly to the next project without conducting a retrospective on a failed project.
• Excessive responsibility was shifted onto someone, but the matter was never officially resolved.
• Mistrust lingers from organizational restructuring, performance evaluations, compensation, or promotion processes.
• While a conflict appears to have ended on the surface, the quality of collaboration continues to decline.

The defining characteristic of a “dead fish” is that it is “officially over.” Therefore, when a leader responds with, “Wasn’t that issue already resolved?” team members find it even harder to speak up. We must address the interpretations, emotions, and mistrust left behind by the event—rather than the past event itself.

3. Venting: Stories That Need to Be Voiced Before They Can Be Resolved

“Venting” may be a somewhat crude term, but the intention is clear. Rather than immediately reaching a conclusion or proposing a solution, some issues need to be voiced and sorted out first.

Examples include the following:

• “I’ve been so swamped with work lately that I feel my judgment is getting clouded.”
• “It’s not a major issue, but there’s something that keeps bothering me.”
• “During the meeting, I felt like my opinion was repeatedly overlooked.”
• “I’m not sure exactly what the problem is, but the team’s atmosphere feels heavy.”

If you ignore these early-stage issues, they can turn into “elephants in the room” or “dead fish” over time. The more an organization encourages speaking up when problems are small, the more likely it is to reduce major conflicts.

Why Naming Issues Is Effective

It breaks down vague “problems” into manageable units

The question “Is there a problem?” is too broad. It’s hard for team members to judge what level of detail to share—whether they should mention minor feelings, bring up past issues, or anything else.

In contrast, asking, “Is there an elephant in the room?”, “Is there a dead fish left behind?”, or “Is there something you just need to get off your chest?” narrows the scope of the conversation. The speaker can find a starting point, and the listener knows what attitude to adopt.

Framing Issues as Collective Reflection Rather Than Personal Attacks

By framing the conversation this way, the focus shifts from “Who is being sensitive?” to “What signals are present in our system?” This is also linked to psychological safety within the organization.

Amy Edmondson of Harvard Business School has described team psychological safety as “a shared belief that it is safe to take interpersonal risks within the team.” In other words, learning and improvement are only possible when members believe they will not be punished or ridiculed for asking questions, admitting mistakes, raising concerns, or expressing dissent.

Improve the Quality of Questions in Meetings and Retrospectives

Good leaders don’t stop at simply saying “Speak up”; they design questions to encourage participation. Preparing situation-specific questions, as shown below, helps reduce silence.

Examples of Situation-Specific Questions

Questions to Identify the “Elephant in the Room” at the End of a Meeting

• “Are there any important concerns from today’s meeting that haven’t been addressed yet?”
• “If this decision moves forward as is, what could become a risk down the line?”
• “Is there a topic that everyone knows about but hasn’t been discussed openly yet?”
• “If you have any objections, speaking up now could help the team. What’s holding you back?”

Questions to Identify “Dead Fish” After a Project Ends

• “Although it’s officially over, are there any lingering emotions or unresolved issues?”
• “What approaches from this project should we avoid repeating in the future?”
• “Is there anything you didn’t fully address at the time?”
• “If the same situation were to arise again, what would you do differently?”

Questions to Encourage Open Discussion in 1-on-1 Meetings

• “If there’s anything weighing on your mind lately, feel free to share it—even if it seems unrelated to work.”
• “It’s okay if you can’t come up with a solution right away. Is there anything you’d like to get off your chest?”
• “Has anything been on your mind recently that you brushed off because it seemed minor?”
• “Is there anything I should know so I can be a better listener?”

Operational Principles Leaders Should Follow

1. Your Response Matters More Than Your Questions

If a team member opens up about a difficult issue and the leader’s initial reaction is defensive, the conversation will come to a halt. In particular, avoid the following responses:

• “Why are you bringing this up now?”
• “That’s a misunderstanding.”
• “Other people said it was fine.”
• “Everyone goes through that.”
• “So, what’s the solution?”

Instead, it’s better to respond as follows:

• “Thank you for sharing that with me.”
• “I’d like to try to understand this first, rather than jumping to conclusions.”
• “I imagine it must have been difficult for you to bring this up.”
• “Even if I can’t provide an answer right now, I’ll follow up on this.”

2. Don’t Try to Resolve Every Issue Immediately

For “venting” types of conversations, active listening and summarizing may come before finding an immediate solution. If a leader jumps into “problem-solving mode” too quickly, the speaker may feel that “my feelings aren’t important—I’m just being treated as a problem to be solved.”

The most effective sequence is as follows:

1. Listen first.
2. Summarize what you’ve heard to confirm understanding.
3. Distinguish between facts, interpretations, and emotions.
4. Ask whether a solution is needed or if simply sharing the issue is sufficient.
5. Agree on any necessary follow-up actions.

3. Don’t rely solely on anonymous channels

Anonymous surveys or reporting channels can help identify sensitive issues. However, a culture of trust cannot be built through anonymous channels alone. What matters is the repeated experience of being able to speak safely during regular meetings and one-on-one conversations.

4. Demonstrate through action that the speaker will not face negative consequences

Psychological safety is built through experience, not declarations. If someone mentions the “elephant” and is then excluded or ridiculed, the rest of the team quickly learns the lesson: “Speaking up comes at a cost.”

Leaders must protect those who raise concerns and shift the focus of the discussion from the individual to the work, the structure, and the decision-making process.

A Simple Process for Applying This to Your Organization

Step 1: Decide whether to use the terms as is or adapt them to your organization

The expressions “elephant,” “dead fish,” and “vomit” may not be suitable for every organization. While they may work humorously in some teams, they might feel too flippant or uncomfortable in others.

The key is not the expressions themselves, but the categorization. You can adapt them to fit your organization as follows:

Step 2: Include fixed questions in the meeting agenda

For example, you can allocate the last 5 minutes of a weekly meeting to the following questions:

• “What’s today’s elephant?”
• “Are there any dead fish carried over from last week?”
• “Is there anything you need to vent about that doesn’t require an immediate conclusion?”

At first, there may be no answers. The important thing is for the leader to ask these questions consistently and to address any small issues that come up in a safe and supportive manner.

Step 3: Document Follow-Up Actions

If members hear nothing but words and see no change, they’ll feel that “there’s no point in speaking up.” While it’s not possible to act on every suggestion, at least the following three points must be clarified:

• What was discussed?
• What will be reviewed or implemented?
• If not, what is the reason?

Step 4: Reflect

This framework itself should also be reviewed periodically.

• Were these questions actually helpful?
• Is it just a few specific people who are speaking up?
• Are there still topics that are difficult to bring up?
• Were there any moments when the leader’s response seemed defensive?

Points to Note

Simply Introducing the Terminology Is Not Enough

Even if you ask, “Is there an elephant in the room?”, the framework becomes nothing more than a formality if it makes the person who actually spoke up feel uncomfortable. Labeling is merely a tool; it cannot replace trust.

Not Everything Should Be Discussed in Public

Sensitive HR matters, harassment, discrimination, legal issues, and health information may not be appropriate for discussion in open meetings. These matters should be addressed through protected procedures and the appropriate channels.

Distinguish Between Expressing Emotions and Verifying Facts

While team members’ emotions must be respected, not every interpretation is necessarily factual. A good conversation acknowledges emotions without ignoring them, while also ensuring fact-checking and procedural fairness when necessary.

Action Checklist for Leaders

• Did you prepare specific questions instead of just saying, “Speak up if there’s a problem”?
• Are you distinguishing between current issues being avoided, past unresolved issues, and unresolved emotions?
• Did you react defensively to the person who spoke up?
• Did you document the discussion and share follow-up actions?
• Did you distinguish between matters to be addressed in open meetings and those requiring confidential procedures?
• Have you, as a leader, ever been the first to speak up about your own mistakes, uncertainties, or concerns?

Conclusion

Silence within an organization does not disappear on its own. Simply saying, “Please speak up anytime,” out of good intentions is not enough. Members must know what they are allowed to say, feel safe when they speak up, and accumulate experiences where their words lead to actual change.

The “elephant,” “dead fish,” and “vomit” frameworks are a language for initiating uncomfortable conversations. The key is not simply to parrot the terminology, but to develop the habit of asking more specific questions about the unspoken issues within the organization and listening to them in a safer environment.