Musings on Meetings

The business year is well and truly up and running now. Some of us were lucky enough to have a few weeks off in January; some (like yours truly) got about ten days' grace before the phone started ringing and the emails coming in. My diary is now filling up with meetings, which led me to some musings this morning.

There are pros and cons for meetings. Many experts advise meetings should replace email dialogue especially if it's an internal dialogue in your own company. Employees should leave their desk and talk to the other person face to face rather than email back and forth. It can often resolve an issue or question far more quickly. I have a personal theory on why people email internally rather than just chat. Firstly, there is a paper trail showing you asked the question should your supervisor bring it up. Secondly, it's a time thing. You might wander down the corridor to see Person B about that issue, but instead of a quick answer Person B gravitates to a range of other subjects and while you murmur that you need to get back to your desk, you can't get away. Until someone else distracts Person B. We've all come across co-workers like Person B, and they are a menace in meetings.

So how do you run a meeting to time when you know one of the participants is in love with his or her own voice? If you are the person calling the meeting and providing the agenda, put times for each agenda topic on the agenda, and stick to them. Make it clear that your meeting will only run for a set period of time. Ring a bell if you have to, when there is 60 seconds to go on a topic. You'll have allocated the most time to the most important topic, naturally. If it looks like you need a LOT more time for that topic, you may have to sacrifice less important agenda items and perhaps cover them by email or a video conference on Skype or vidcon software.

When I worked in the corporate world years ago we had a monthly marketing meeting for which one and a half hours was allocated. It never ran less than three hours. I dreaded it each month. The minutes of the previous meeting would circulate at least a week or two beforehand so everyone could read them and note anything they wished to bring up in particular, but participants in the meeting persisted in reading through them aloud at the meetings, every word. And THEN adding new information verbally. Time and again I suggested we get rid of the Ceremonial Reading of the Minutes but the marketing managers still insisted on reading them rather than just concentrating on new developments. I hope your meetings, gentle readers, run better than those did.

Does scheduling a meeting near lunchtime or at the end of the day make it run quicker or more effectively? Not always. Those marketing meetings in the last para started at 11am and no lunch was provided because they were supposed to be concluded by 12.30pm. The sound of rumbling stomachs could be heard over the Ceremonial Reading of the Minutes by 1.30pm. Likewise I try to avoid scheduling meetings for the end of the day; people are thinking about getting home around fiveish, they are tired, and if they have had a stressful day the last thing they feel like is participating in a meeting which may load them with more actions and more stress. Their attention won't be on the meeting and while the meeting may run quickly, it may not be effective as people might not participate as fully as they could; the less they say, the sooner they can get away.

Do you have any tips for effective and swift meetings you'd like to share? Write your comments below or email me an article for an upcoming Intercomm.