Some best practices are so obvious they are often missed or overlooked. Or we presume they are in place when they aren’t. This is certainly the case for the practice of clarifying next steps before concluding any group meeting.
The vibe I get, when sitting through a meeting like that is generally one of two things:
-The manager just found out about it; in which case, I attempt to be understanding (that's on upper management's poor communication).
-The manager didn't do their homework in preparing for this meeting.
Either way, we want to have someone assigned to redirect us. Should the conversation go off topic. Even if the team doesn't care for the topic, this will show professionalism and emphasize the importance of the team's objective/s.
As tedious as it sounds to some, I found that having clearly (and consistently structured) orders of business and rules of order to follow not only made meetings more productive, but also made them livelier and more efficient. At the end of such meetings, we knew what we had accomplished, so it was easy to note and assign next steps. Accountability was built into the next meeting agenda.
What is more, using these rules for more planned and formal meetings meant that we built a culture where even informal meetings adhered to the same understanding. I will never understand why people resist these structures, which ensure fairness and effectiveness when used appropriately, and opt instead to sit through disheartening, pointless, and nonproductive meetings.
Yes. There is something rhythmic and seasonal that leaders can take advantage of in adhering to the kind of agenda you reference. And it still allows for a lot of variety even thought it might sound tedious. The feeling of tedium comes from a leader doing the same thing every time in each section of the agenda.
Just like four seasons in a year don't become boring, the variety of things you do within that rhythm keep the routine full of life.
I suspect this has more to do with their upbringing and/or environment growing up. I have found to truly get these individuals' attention; we have to first find a way to connect with them. Even then it is a razor's edge.
Over the years, I learned as group leader that taking notes on “who will do what by when” is important, so those items are discussed during the meeting and, at the end, next steps can be recapped.
I was asked to lead meetings (at times) because I would capture more of that than others, so it became important to start using humor and other strategies to mentor my peers.
Interestingly, people who would inevitably could sidetrack a meeting or add additional burdens were less likely to do that if their comments were wrapped up by the leader asking “who would do what by when?”
It’s a simple mantra that helps move meetings forward and makes talk about next steps very simple. Surprisingly international meetings go better with this because non-native speakers tend to understand the essence of what’s expected.
Great observation and astute question. I think there were times when we did miss out on some productive "what if's," however we usually had more to do in our day(s)/week(s) than time allowed so once people got used to it - a year or more- they'd offer it up themselves: "I'll do X by Y date" and we were then able to ease up on the pattern and allow for more brainstorming.
It's possible we underestimate the power of a behavior being absorbed/embraced into a group dynamic by others after it's consistently repeated. I would suppose other Admired Leadership behaviors are like that as well.... ones that become culturally normative and open doors to new group dynamics, sort of a meta-behavior approach takes place.
But I'm still learning the behaviors so it may be you cover that already in later videos!
Worthy bookend to this note from 2022:
https://admiredleadership.substack.com/p/deciding-the-desired-outcome-of-meetings
Good morning all,
Another solid post.
The vibe I get, when sitting through a meeting like that is generally one of two things:
-The manager just found out about it; in which case, I attempt to be understanding (that's on upper management's poor communication).
-The manager didn't do their homework in preparing for this meeting.
Either way, we want to have someone assigned to redirect us. Should the conversation go off topic. Even if the team doesn't care for the topic, this will show professionalism and emphasize the importance of the team's objective/s.
Thanks for your time.
That lack of preparation one is probably the most common to see.
As tedious as it sounds to some, I found that having clearly (and consistently structured) orders of business and rules of order to follow not only made meetings more productive, but also made them livelier and more efficient. At the end of such meetings, we knew what we had accomplished, so it was easy to note and assign next steps. Accountability was built into the next meeting agenda.
What is more, using these rules for more planned and formal meetings meant that we built a culture where even informal meetings adhered to the same understanding. I will never understand why people resist these structures, which ensure fairness and effectiveness when used appropriately, and opt instead to sit through disheartening, pointless, and nonproductive meetings.
Yes. There is something rhythmic and seasonal that leaders can take advantage of in adhering to the kind of agenda you reference. And it still allows for a lot of variety even thought it might sound tedious. The feeling of tedium comes from a leader doing the same thing every time in each section of the agenda.
Just like four seasons in a year don't become boring, the variety of things you do within that rhythm keep the routine full of life.
Good morning Professor Salvucci,
I suspect this has more to do with their upbringing and/or environment growing up. I have found to truly get these individuals' attention; we have to first find a way to connect with them. Even then it is a razor's edge.
I suppose that's all part of leadership;)
Thank you for your time.
I hope you have a good day.
-Joe
Over the years, I learned as group leader that taking notes on “who will do what by when” is important, so those items are discussed during the meeting and, at the end, next steps can be recapped.
I was asked to lead meetings (at times) because I would capture more of that than others, so it became important to start using humor and other strategies to mentor my peers.
Interestingly, people who would inevitably could sidetrack a meeting or add additional burdens were less likely to do that if their comments were wrapped up by the leader asking “who would do what by when?”
It’s a simple mantra that helps move meetings forward and makes talk about next steps very simple. Surprisingly international meetings go better with this because non-native speakers tend to understand the essence of what’s expected.
Cheers all for the Field Notes!
Thanks for your response today, Joseph!
Great unintended consequence to this routine you've mentioned too.
Did you ever get the idea you missed out on people speaking out productively because of your how you consistently wrapped meetings up like this?
Great observation and astute question. I think there were times when we did miss out on some productive "what if's," however we usually had more to do in our day(s)/week(s) than time allowed so once people got used to it - a year or more- they'd offer it up themselves: "I'll do X by Y date" and we were then able to ease up on the pattern and allow for more brainstorming.
It's possible we underestimate the power of a behavior being absorbed/embraced into a group dynamic by others after it's consistently repeated. I would suppose other Admired Leadership behaviors are like that as well.... ones that become culturally normative and open doors to new group dynamics, sort of a meta-behavior approach takes place.
But I'm still learning the behaviors so it may be you cover that already in later videos!
I like this.
I have a meeting chair that asks the question 'what have we achieved in this meeting'. Often leaves people stumped for a response!!