WHAT’S WRONG WITH MEETINGS?

There are many factors that contribute to the success or failure of the weekly staff meeting.

• Participants – are the right people in the room, are some of the wrong people in the room?
• Preparation – has each participant completed the preparatory reading and thinking about the issues?
• Rules – are participants following standard norms and rules for meetings?
• Trust – is there enough trust in the room to be vulnerable with each other and engage in ideological conflict

There is another factor, less obvious but no less important, a simple execution plan for the work to be done between meetings. The simple execution plan answers three questions: WHO? Does WHAT? By WHEN?

WHO? A what without a who is a forgotten. How many times have you reviewed minutes from a previous meeting, only to realize something got dropped, “Oh yah, we said we’d have that done by today.” Key word – we. Whenever you see, “we” in your minutes, consider it an invitation to clarify who – who takes ownership of the action? It must be a single person and that person needs to be in the room then accept the responsibility. That doesn’t mean they do all the work but they are responsible to make sure the work gets done. If the work will be delegated to someone else or a group of people not in the meeting, one person in the meeting must still own the responsibility to make sure everything gets delegated AND done. It’s not enough to delegate, the work needs to get done.

WHAT? This requires a brief but clear description of what must be done and agreed upon by everyone in the room. Too often we clarify commitment by asking, “So, we agree this needs to be done?” Everyone nods. What exactly has been agreed too? It remains unclear. The nods are an external expression of an internal assumption about what actually needs to get done. Without clarifying a single understanding, team members may go off in different directions assuming they were on the same page. Instead of asking for commitment, ask for clarity, “So, what exactly needs to be done?” This defines the work more clearly.

WHEN? A what without a when is a never. The deadline must be as precise as possible. “It needs to be complete by fall 2018,” is problematic. What is meant by the fall? It could mean September 1^st because many consider the start of a school year as the start of the fall season. It could mean December 20^th because the first day of winter is December 21st. What if the boss assumed fall meant September 1^st and the staff responsible for the work assumed December 20^th? Also, as soon as possible is not a deadline even if ASAP is bold in the meeting minutes – that communicates urgency but not a specific deadline.

This isn’t rocket science, but as they say, simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.  A few simple improvements executed consistently over time, is far better than a thousand complicated plans left undone.

The purpose of meetings is to make decisions and delegate work. For your next weekly staff meeting, consider inserting a simple table into your minutes. The table should have three categories:

•  What – to capture a clear description of the work to be done
•  Who – to identify the name of the person assigned the work
•  When – to commit a deadline to the work owned by the person

Please leave a comment to share 1 or 2 tips that you have developed for improving the weekly staff meeting. Thanks.