Death by Meeting
This is the title of Patrick Lencioni’s 2004 book. It proclaims what many of us think but don’t say out loud: Our meetings can often be ineffective and a waste of precious time. What comes to mind is distinct memories of an organization in my past where we had meetings to have meetings.
Ever had a meeting, and thought, “what was the point?” I already know the answer. It is merely a punch in the throat to get us thinking about how we can make them more effective. How can we build out formats that deliver a better use of time with greater intention, and at the end…have a point?
Maybe we should write a new book, like Success by Meeting. What would the differentiator be? I don’t think it is in the vision or the inspiration wrapped around a cause. Most organizations have a clarity of purpose. I believe the pivot is the WHY into HOW. It is in the clarity of action. I believe we are great at ideation, but executing those ideas… is the gap in meetings.
Meetings must have a Blueprint
That is what Lencioni was alluding to. We transform from one type of meeting to another. To a more disciplined meeting model that reduces ambiguity and waste by fostering passion, directing purpose, AND THEN culminating in an aligned course of action.
He proposed a four-part meeting model to improve engagement and productivity: a Daily Check-In for quick alignment (under 10 mins), a Weekly Tactical Meeting to address immediate issues (45-90 mins), a Monthly Strategic Meeting for in-depth discussion of critical organizational topics (2-4 hours), and a Quarterly or Bi-Annual Off-Site Meeting for high-level strategy and team development (1-2 days).
I wholeheartedly believe the most effective meeting format is the Check-In Meeting. A consistent meeting that provides a “pulse check” forum with team members (a.k.a. the implementors and front-liner contributors doing the work in real time). I also believe it not only precedes all the other meetings, but it also exists as a necessary meeting format in the midst of implementation, and especially after all the meetings to ensure follow-through. Adoption will always be the critical element of any endeavor. Checking in keeps whatever the thing is top of mind and directs specific action towards its’ successful output.
Bottom line, a meeting is only as good as the action it directs. So, when we have a meeting, we need to have a point. It’s so much better for the attendee.
How important are the components of meetings?
Aristotle famously stated, “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts”. Yes, this concept can be true that a combined whole creates something more meaningful or powerful than its individual components could achieve on their own. As it pertains to meetings, I contend “The whole is made great because of the sum of its parts”. It is what we promote and permit in the meeting that creates a culture of effectiveness.
Simply put, meetings must have a clear “what, why, how, and to what extent”. Every component in that meeting must clearly answer those questions. It needs to consider an active engagement of all parties with a shared vision, cohort interaction, collaboration of insight and best practices, clear behavioral expectations, and a defined follow-up and follow through action plan. This can happen in 10 minutes or 2 days. Time isn’t the thing; it’s clarity of action. As Marie Forleo said, “Clarity comes from engagement, not thought”, or hosting a meeting just to talk about stuff.
We are about to have the second of our bi-annual leadership summits. We are intentionally and collaboratively looking at how we ensure the meeting has purpose and a defined action plan to follow. We are making it more an experience of sharing best practices towards the goal of clarity of action. We want people to leave inspired AND equipped to do what needs to get done. The emphasis is on the action that follows. We want the meeting attendees to all have an aligned answer to the question…what’s the point? The effectiveness will be revealed in the answer.
If you’re interested in developing effective meetings, consider the following questions.
- What is your definition of an “effective” meeting?
- How are meetings currently seen by your organization, departments, and/or team?
- What is your current blueprint for meetings?
- What elements make them effective?
- And if they are seen an “ineffective”, what needs to change?
- What is your post-meeting adoption strategy?
- If I asked someone to assess their last meeting with you, what would they say?
