November 2000

Meetings that matter 

BY ARTHUR H. BELL

“Meetings are not our proudest moment, I must admit, in my rental company. We often get distracted by trivia, let the same people talk on and on, and end up accomplishing nothing. Have any suggestions?” Yes.

Staff meetings are an expensive habit. You’re calling people away from their day-to-day tasks to … well, just talk. At your next meeting, add up what the company is spending in prorated salary or hourly wages to have the participants sit around a table for a couple hours — and then ask if the meeting earned its keep. It’s not uncommon to discover that thousand-dollar meetings were called to deal with a $100 problem.

Better meetings begin by asking an obvious question: Do we really need to meet? 

If a personal conversation, phone call or e-mail to a few people can settle a matter, there’s no good reason to convene the troops and waste most of the morning or afternoon. Every meeting leader should be able to say at the beginning of a meeting exactly why the gathering is necessary and what needs to be accomplished.

If a meeting is required, make sure that the right people — and only the right people — are asked to attend. We’ve all had the annoying experience of sitting in a bad meeting and asking ourselves, “Why am I here?” That question is particularly frustrating when real work is piling up on our desk. Management sage Peter Drucker put the matter wryly: “We can meet or we can work. We can’t do both at the same time.”

Here are 10 quick questions that can help a meeting leader run a productive, cost-effective meeting: 

1. Did I send out an agenda with enough advance notice so people could put the meeting on the calendar?

2. Did I let people know what materials to bring along to the meeting and how to prepare for discussion?

3. Did I start and end the meeting on time? (Everyone loves a meeting leader who starts a 9-to-10:30 a.m. meeting precisely at 9 a.m. and concludes it no later than 10:30 a.m., unless the group wants to extend the time.) 

4. Did I begin the meeting by clearly stating its main purpose(s) and setting goals for what the meeting can — and is expected to — accomplish?

5. Did I remember that God gave me two ears and one mouth — and that they should be used in that proportion? (Meeting leaders need to avoid lecturing.)

6. Did I draw all participants into discussion (“Linda, give us your perspective”) as a way of preventing the Big Mouths from dominating?

7. Did I focus the discussion (“Let’s make sure we’re clear on this point”) to bring the group back from distractions?

8. Did I work for consensus rather than “us vs. them” votes?

9. Did I conclude the meeting by summing up what was decided and recapping any individual assignments or deadlines?

10. Did I make sure that accurate minutes for meeting were distributed within a day or two after the meeting?

Some leaders are guilty of the “drama or trauma” approach to meetings. With a flair for the dramatic, the Star Leader assembles the troops merely as an audience to watch him rant, bluster and moan. 

Or the Star Leader calls a meeting for the purpose of trauma — that is, the public humilation of the guilty and the blessing of the saints. Such psychodrama may help the Star Leader work out his issues, but it does little to build the team, inspire achievement or get work done.

Other meeting leaders are guilty of the “red, white and blue” options for company meetings. Red meetings are called (usually with five minutes’ notice) when the boss is fit to be tied and wants to scream at people. These are the meetings in which there is usually more heat than light. 

White meetings are the neutral, ho-hum meetings that were entered on the leader’s calendar months in advance. Why hold the Monday meeting? Because it’s Monday, of course. We always meet on Monday morning — even when there’s little reason to do so.

Blue meetings are called when the bored or isolated leader feels “it would just be good to get together.” These are the Lonesome Guy meetings that have no particular agenda and plod on, sometimes for hours, all in the name of “touching base with one another” and “sharing.” Some companies save time and money by getting the Blue Leader a cat.

The responsibility for better meetings rests on participants as well as leaders. Bad meetings can often be blamed on participants who arrive late, conduct sidebar conversations throughout the meeting, pop in and out to handle phone calls or simply sit silent while others work in the meeting.

At root, such participants have settled on a narrow set of roles they are determined to play out in each meeting they attend.

John the Objector will begin each of his comments with “But …” 

Ida the Idea Person will ignore previous discussion to offer “a new way of looking at things.” 

Sam the Cynic will mutter, “I just don’t think we’re making any progress.” 

Colleen the Closer will insist that the group “just decide — we’ve wasted enough time talking.”

When such participants stick to their standard roles, it’s no wonder that meetings become yawners. Just by looking at the list of attendees you can predict approximately who will say what and how the meeting will devolve into chat or conflict. 

Such predictable meetings are the death of creativity in companies — a cul de sac, as one writer put it, “into which ideas are lured to be quietly strangled.”

To avoid such stagnation, meeting participants should challenge themselves to take on at least three or four roles that they don’t habitually play in a meeting. This fresh-face approach to meeting participation can enliven discussion, resolve old conflicts and make meetings a stimulating part of the work day. Here’s a list of meeting roles from which new roles can be selected:

• Idea person (Here’s an idea …)

• Expander (Yes, and that also means …)

• Associator (I agree with that because …) 

• Objector (I object because … )

• Devil’s advocate (I don’t necessarily object, but let me play out a contrary idea …)

• Complimenter (I think that idea deserves a lot of credit or praise because …)

• Bridge-builder (Let’s put some of the group’s idea together — for example … )

• Consensus seeker (So let’s pause for a moment. Are we all in agreement that … )

• Sect seeker (Some of us don’t feel that way. Do you want to hear from the minority?)

• Closer (Let’s at least make a decision on this, so we can move on)

• Evaluator (So far I think we’ve done a good job dealing with … )

• Personalizer (I can just tell you how I feel!)

• Criticizer (I don’t think we’re getting to the real issues …)

• Peacemaker (I’m sure we’re all trying our best to find solutions … ) 

• Summarizer (Let me stop everyone for a minute so I can sum up what’s been said so far …)

• Questioner (Tell me why you feel so strongly about that point …)

• Motive assassin (You’re taking that position because it helps you …)

• Emotion meter (Here’s the feeling I’m getting from all this …) 

• Derailer (This may be way off track, but …)

• Authoritarian (Look, here’s the way it is …)

• Submissive (I guess you’re right. I didn’t see it that way, but you’re probably right.)

• Goal-keeper (This talk is fine, but where does it lead? What are we trying to decide?)

• Divider (We basically have two separate camps here. One says …)

• Attacker (That’s entirely wrong. I don’t think you have any evidence to support your point)

• Defender (I think we’re all being too hard on ______. He’s only saying that …)

No meeting participant, of course, plays all or even most of these roles. The point is simply that most of us are in a rut when it comes to the standard roles we play over and over in meetings. We can each do our part to make meetings more productive — and, yes, more fun — by making our moves less predictable in the discussion game.

New roles wake other people up to what we’re saying.

How do you get participants to develop these new discussion options and skills? Probably the best way is to devote a training meeting to the topic of better meetings. Two excellent videos to support such training are “Meetings, Bloody Meetings” and “More Bloody Meetings,” both starring John Cleese (VideoArts Productions).

When meeting leaders get their act together and meeting participants take on a few new roles, meetings can begin to serve their intended function in business life: a brief gathering where issues are examined fairly, debate is conducted energetically but respectfully, and decisions are reached that lead to worthwhile action. That’s a meeting we would all like to attend.