Comments on: Is This Meeting Really Necessary?

By: Selwyn, Productive Meetings

Selwyn, Productive Meetings — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:52:43 +0000

The argument often appears to be online versus offline however just maybe there’s a place for both to co-exist by playing to the benefits of each.

Take brainstorming meetings.

Usually the person who called the meeting starts by explaining the rules of braisntorming . . . 1) there’s no such thing as a bad idea and 2) everyone has an equal voice. Both rules quickly go out of the window as the most dominant players in the room dominate proceedings and 3 hours later a weary tribe leaves the meeting room with copious sheets of paper with ideas to type up having made little progress.

How about splitting the process into the collation of ideas (online) and the exploitation of those ideas (offline) ?

Here’s what I mean – conduct the brainstorming online using one of any number of available tools (e.g. http://www.matchpeg.com), each participanst types in their ideas live and spark off each other as they see other peoples ideas pop-up. It’s like instant messaging on steroids and avoids the tendency to discuss each idea at length and then head off down blind alleys all the time.

This should take no longer than 10 minutes rather than an hour or more. Then everyone assigns a score to all the ideas and they get ranked – again online – and you’ve now got a complete list of ideas, ranked and documented in less than 15 minutes without anyone meeting face to face.

The reality is that the reports this type of activity can produce about team dynamics are fascinating – i.e. a narcissism rating, who voted for their bosses ideas and shunned certain colleagues !!

Now if you do want to discuss the ideas that everyone has already agreed are the best, then by all means hold a meeting but chances are you’ll need less time and less people and everyone will be more focused.

By: Weekly links roundup by Communications from DMN

Weekly links roundup by Communications from DMN — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:33:33 +0000

[...] Johnson asks “is this meeting really necessary?” In many cases, it [...]

By: karen

karen — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:19:23 +0000

This post and its comments bring up a lot of valuable points. I conclude that regardless of which type of meeting you hold – online/virtual or face-to-face, discipline is the real key to success. I mean the discipline to focus and discuss, as well as the discipline to prepare in advance (if required at the meeting.)

One angle that is not mentioned – situations where you cannot meet face-to-face due to geographical (and perhaps financial) constraints. When you can only meet online, discipline and structure for meetings is vital. I struggle with this as a SIG leader and as the SIG Advocate in STC because all my meetings and communication are virtual. I live in Denmark where I also know people online, but where I have opportunities to meet with many of them casually or at official gatherings. I do feel a sense of relief at these gatherings. Conversation is much different.

It’s all a matter of making the best of both situations. That sounds like common sense, but like much that is common sense, we often forget it. Thanks for the reminders here, Tom.

By: dave davison

dave davison — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:04:33 +0000

Tom: Thanks for the insightful post comparing some of the key elements that make meetings work. I have used talented graphic facilitators to add visual value in F2F meetings and have now organized a new service bringing the talents of these outstanding visual interpreters to the virtual meeting.

Given what you have said in this blog post and how you position the complementary values of F2F and Online meetings, I would like to give you an online demonstration of Virtual Visuals for the purposes of extending your “myriad of online tools” for organizing and curating meetings that work and getting your feedback and new input on how this service ( still in stealth mode) might help online meeting conveners and participants.

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:54:06 +0000

It’s a good discussion and a good post, Tom. Thanks for startting it.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:27:42 +0000

Cindy, I’m glad you point out the value of both types of meetings. I guess with blog posts, taking an extreme position on one side is somewhat of an incendiary tactic. I don’t talk much about the benefits of in-person meetings, though I agree that in many cases they’re appropriate, such as when you’re located near the people, the topic requires discussion, or as Joe pointed out, you need to refine your ideas. Unfortunately, in-person meetings have become the default mode for collaboration because people are often too lazy to engage online. Sometimes the only way to draw people out is through a face-to-face discussion.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:24:34 +0000

Ann, thanks for joining in to the discussion.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:23:03 +0000

Joe, thanks for taking the time to comment. I appreciated reading your articulate response. I agree with part of what you say. Here’s what I agree with: most meetings are poorly orchestrated. In fact, at the time you commented, I was in a meeting that lasted 2 hours. The first half hour, we looked around for an open room because the scheduled room was occupied. Then one of the people talked about a car he was planning to buy. Other people talked about cars as well. After about a half hour, the PM projected a roadmap and wandered through it a bit. Discussions wandered all over the place. Some parts were relevant to me, others not so much. The meeting ran 30 min. over, and when I left (b/c my wife phoned me three times in a row), they were talking about golf clubs.

I’m not against the social benefits of meetings. I look forward to our weekly team meeting precisely because of the social elements. But despite what you say about planning a productive meeting, it seems that at least half the meetings I attend are too loosely structured, irrelevant, and drone on too long. A 2 hour meeting (including the travel to and from the meeting) can easily drain the better part of an afternoon.

Now, I realize you’re arguing that an effective meeting (the opposite type of meeting I just described) can be powerful and more productive than online exchanges. Sure, I will grant that. But a productive online exchange can also be powerful. Online discussions often fail for the same reason meetings fail: poor planning, lack of preparation, no leader, etc. If people put the energy into the online contribution, like you’re doing here, the exchange can be more powerful. In fact, your ability to articulate your opinion at a time convenient to you, and my response at a time convenient to me, producing an exchange of ideas that is somewhat fruitful, kind of negates your argument about the ineffectualness of online exchanges.

Additionally, online exchanges have another advantage. Unlike in-person exchanges (which don’t always allow people time to think and compose their thoughts, and which often include an emotional charge), with online discussions you can carefully dissect logic, think at your leisure, and respond with as many edits as you want before you hit reply.

I see that I’ve upset a few people in our chapter with my post. Sorry about that. I didn’t mean to offend. I should have probably used a different meeting as an example. Now we’re putting a lot of burden on our August 1 meeting, aren’t we? I’m really looking forward to it. I know it will be brilliant.

By: Ann Gordon

Ann Gordon — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:23:21 +0000

Hello Joe,
You made your case well. I agree with you: I still prefer in-person meetings when they are feasible. I especially appreciate your last two sentences, and agree with you.

Thanks for taking the (extended) time to make your case on this subject!
Ann

By: Cindy Pao

Cindy Pao — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 20:54:11 +0000

I, too, prefer meetings in person; however, I know the value of online communication. We’ve done it in STC Houston when the Admin Council had to discuss and vote on a topic between in-person meetings.

Where I work now, one of the reasons face-to-face meetings are required is to communicate safety information. Our trainers here have a class devoted to teaching people to organize effective meetings. (I’m actually going to ask one of co-workers to present the topic to my Girl Scouts!)

I think both types of meetings can be and are valuable. But getting them organized and executed effectively is the key!