Surface Ripples

To Go or Not to Go?

Much of our lives as leaders can be spent in meetings.  When a certain financial institution acquired another, the institution that was acquired was known as “much in discussion, little and nothing done”.

Suffice to say though that that little mnemonic or aide-memoir revealed plenty about the attitudes of each organisation to meetings. In the first meetings seemed to be the raison d’être for managers. In the other they were held when necessary.

I meetings are well-run, they can really move things on.  More often than not, they aren’t and as a result waste people’s time and provoke resentment.  There may or may not be an agenda, someone to take minutes, a designated “chair” and other team members.  The next time you attend a meeting, see how many people are surreptitiously checking emails, messages, social media or other channels rather than engaging in the meeting.

If asked to attend a meeting, ask:

What’s the purpose of the meeting (solve a problem, reach a decision, share information)?

What value will I add by attending? (Do I need to attend? Can someone attend in my place?  Will it simply suffice for me to receive a copy of the action items that pertain to me, my team or department)?

If I have to attend, is it possible to attend only that part of the meeting for which my presence is required?

Honest answers to those questions quickly reveal whether our presence is mandatory, desirable, or unnecessary.  

I appreciate that in some cases, this isn’t possible.  Meetings depend on the organisation, its leaders and culture.  A productive meeting can be held and concluded within 30 minutes if properly arranged, controlled and minuted. I know some teams that hold their team meetings standing up to discourage relaxing from sitting down and thereby losing concentration! 

I’ve attended team meetings where things had become a ritual: boss speaks, team listens, updates each other on what’s going on, the end. These were useful if the team wasn’t regularly in the office. However, where they worked at a “cluster” of desks where everyone could hear everyone else, it was usually obvious what was going on.

In some cases, it may simply be enough to change a weekly meeting to monthly.  Imagine, instead of one 1-hour meeting a week, only one is held every month, freeing up 40 hours/year  or five working days per person (assuming a working day of eight hours).  What could we all achieve with fve extra days?

Be all that as it may, we have to work within the constraints imposed by others.  If “the boss” says we shall have one 60-minute meeting a week, we have one…  If, however, one can prove to said boss that there’s another, better, way of doing things, there’s hope.

I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management.  I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website  provides a full picture of my portfolio of services.  

Labels: Career, Leadership, Productivity, Teamwork

posted by William Martin @ 08:48