Good meetings are good only when they produce actionable results. That only happens when the leader of the meeting or conference call sets an idiot-proof agenda, maintains order and remembers the human factor.
Today is Wednesday and I have been in 9 internal meetings this week that I wasn't leading. Only 2 of them were well-planned so I had 7 bad, bad meetings. Here are a few traits I noticed from these meetings and in some cases, I've added how I combat the issue:
- On average, the first 8 minutes were spent discussing sports, weekend plans, kids, etc. Basically, it was absolutely unproductive and cost us time and money. How much? Well on average, the meetings had 6 participants so a total of 48 minutes that were lost for EACH meeting. Multiply that by 7 meetings and you have over 5 hours of lost time! I don't know about you but I'd kind of like my team to get those 5 hours back.
- Getting passed this is very simple. As the leader of the meeting you need to be on time and you have to show some authority. I am not saying you should bring a gavel and bang on the table, but plan to be 2 minutes early and try to kill the small talk as it begins.
- If the meeting was scheduled to begin at 2:00, you should start at 2:00 regardless of who you are waiting on. There is no reason to delay 6 people just because 1 person is late.
- If you've invited someone that is too social, engage them in a project related conversation the second they get into the conference room/call. Do NOT give them a chance to bring up any hobbies, cats, kids, etc.
- Issues that were important to more vocal people got the attention. Issues important to the project itself, seemingly got pushed aside.
- This is counter-productive and I've seen this a ton. My meeting invitations always include an agenda that people can add things to in the days before the meeting. It is basically a public agenda in the notes section of an Outlook meeting invite. As the manager, I then objectively decide what points are the most important to the project, set the master agenda, and redistribute it the morning of the meeting. Less important issues are handled offline to and only include pertinent parties as opposed to an entire project team. When the vocal people stray in the meeting, it is MY responsibility to reel them in and redirect the conversation.
- This one has always killed me. A few of the meeting's I've been invited to had 2 or 3 hours blocked off in my calender. I cringe just thinking about it. While certain topics certainly require that kind of attention, you need to watch this because you will always notice people not paying attention after the first 30 minutes. There is an old myth that says a human's attention span in minutes is 10 + the person's age. It's actually on Wikipedia and they don't buy it but I do. Take a look at people in your meetings and see if you agree. Blank stares, doodling, whacking away at their blackberry - you will definitely see it. If people are in a trance, they are clearly not thinking about contributing to your meeting or solving problems. How much does that help you, your project, or your company?
- This solution is so simple yet people don't practice it. If your meeting is this long, schedule small breaks or schedule a breakout session where teams can work on a task applicable to the topic. You have to break it up somehow and this can be done in the conference room and on conference calls.
- If someone is really typing heavy on the blackberry, think about how important their involvement is in that particular meeting. Clearly this person either knows everything already or doesn't need to provide input. To be fair, certain issues do require an immediate response, but I've seen people typing away in meeting after meeting for 20 minutes. If they don't really need to be there, don't invite them simply for the sake of feeling important and having a "big" meeting.
- Things were solved but who is doing what?
- On most projects people are in charge of certain tasks, and yes, I believe that those accountable should know their responsibilities. However, I've always liked the idea of assigning a note-taker and sending a post-meeting summary to the group. I've seen too many instances where items from the meeting were either forgotten or misunderstood so we had to reconvene again AFTER hours were spent moving in the wrong direction. It's just a waste of resources.
- The hangover affect costs money. No, we're not talking about cocktails, we're talking about the 15 minutes after a meeting where people congregate and chit-chat after a meeting.
- My managerial response to this is SO WHAT. After a long meeting, I would let people unwind a little. I know that I can be a boring guy to listen to so I loosen up a little. Let people chat, finish their sandwich, whatever. I'd rather blow 15 minutes now as opposed to settling for an hour of 50% productivity by mandating they "return to their desks NOW".
- Set a firm agenda
- Assign a note-taker
- Carve out Micro-Meetings
- Hold Office Hours
- Discourage Politics
- Stick to the clock
As I am about to submit this post, I notice that Business Week this morning explains how Google tries to run their meetings. I am honestly in Google overload lately, but their points are similar what I do:
