I learned a more pragmatic, even meeting-hostile approach to meetings: http://hackaday.com/2016/10/06/life-on-contract-how-to-have-...
1. The Problem, communicated in advance, understood by all parties
2. The Exit Condition
3. Time Boxed
4. The Actionable tasks, when they will be done, who they are communicated to
Nothing is more frustrating than company cultures which allow the "meetings never start on time, so I'll show up late" / "not everyone is here on time so I'll wait a few more minutes" death spiral. It's like a game of chicken to see who thinks their time is more valuable than everyone else's.
Not every topic can be covered adequately in a pithy aphorism that fits into 140 characters or less. Attempting to jam such a complex topic as "running meetings" into a short format just for the sake of being short would not work. There are too many exceptions and contingencies. If they are ignored, the article would not be not a useful guide to "meetings" in general.
1. Post message
2. Get upvotes
Meetings are like teamwork trips. They are the illusion of progress.
There are situations where they are necessary but nothing beat ongoing discussions around actual work.
Ask: 1) What's the agenda?
2) I don't see why I need to be there. Do you really need me?
3) If there isn't a solid YES to (2), then answer "I'll keep that time open. Call me if something comes up that needs my input."
It's amazing how many unnecessary people are invited to meetings under the guise of "he may be interested/have input."
Respect people's time and don't waste it!
Poorly-run meetings give the illusion of progress, but I posit that well-run meetings are actually a good thing. They shouldn't be gab-fests; they should be intentional, with reasons for existing and with some sort of output (e.g. 'the design for the new subsystem' or 'the team will understand and be prepared to address the causes for our failure to ship').
And the rules themselves anticipate that not every meeting needs to use every rule. The basic ideas are good ones (e.g. record minutes of the meeting or the chairman should run the meeting but not take sides).
Not that complex. I run meetings quite often, and they always work fine. Now workshops are a different think...
Another great one is to differentiate between items which are 'for decision' and those that are 'for discussion' - it sets expectations. If something is 'for decision' then the max-4-sides reading materials should cover all aspects (pros/cons) and it should be possible to make a decision from the materials.
If something is 'for discussion' then the meeting is going to contribute to the reading materials so there will be missing parts, or perhaps controversies that need to be hammered out in the meeting.
1) Wait 5 to 10 minutes for everyone to join
2) Spend additional 5 minutes getting your computer hooked into the projector and shared with remote participants
3) Read through your powerpoint
4) Ask for feedback. Receive comments about your choice of font for the powerpoint.
5) Thank everyone for the meeting and head to the next one.
That would be 2.5, they will be unsolicited, and yes, your font really is too small.
2.6 is where you spend another five minutes faffing about with the font size until everyone is happy.
(which is why I rarely use slides and even more rarely put any text in them)
(but if you're demoing anything on a computer screen, the same applies)
By the same token, this is not terrible useful for me in terms of work meetings which are extremely informal in comparison. They are also intended to achieve a different goal.
I'd say that both types of meetings are appropriate for their goals, but I've also been surprised at just how effective the more formal meetings have been in achieving progress and consensus.
Considering that I spend upwards of 2 hours per day in meetings it is amazing how little time I have dedicated into thinking about how to make meetings more efficient. I don't think I'm the only one to make this mistake. Just because you have 5 people sitting in a room talking does not mean we are going anywhere or we are making any decisions.
Does anybody have a book recommendation where I can read more about how to maximize productivity of meetings?
-8) Eliminate boat anchors wasting time of previous with non-value-add bullshit.
here are my takes on meetings in general, some correlated to the article's sentiments:
1. avoid meetings when possible, avoid them like the plague. as a meeting organizer, you need to be very clear about your objective/goal for the meeting, so don't be too liberal with other people's time, but this also means when being asked to attend a meeting, cancelling or rejecting the ones you deem to be useless. learn to just say "no". as an engineer i feel this sometimes lowers your favorability in the eyes of managers or peers, but this sets the right culture and tone, if you're in a company where you attend a lot of useless meetings, i feel for you.
2. avoid meetings when possible
3. avoid meetings when possible
4. for decision making meetings, limit the number, preferably <= 3, the more people you add, the more opinions you have to filter which sets things back. lots of my key decisions are done in private with one person. ever go into that meeting with 11 people in the room, all ready to say something for the sake of saying something? run, run as fast as you can!
5. always list actions triggered from the meeting and follow up on them adamantly with owners assigned before leaving the room. the meetings where there's a lot of talk, but then everyone leaves without clear ownership are a waste of time.
6. for developers, it's important to recognize that they maybe in "the zone", so if i must have a meeting with developers, i try to organize this during the beginning or end of the day, meetings during the middle of day tend to break them out of the zone, then they have to context switch back to that deep problem that they were thinking about which would be a huge productivity fail on everyone's part.
7. keep things concise, we're not here to small talk about families or the warriors, do that at the water cooler. some people use this as an ice breaker to relax the mood, but that is just potentially a cover up for some big shit storm about to happen.
8. for the meetings where you're trying to pass down information, keep it concise again, ok to reiterate key messaging, believe the shit that you're saying, have conviction.
9. keep track of time, i hate all the assholes that overrun meeting times, i tend to attend these meetings less and less, if they can't prove that they can hold effective meetings then you lose my time.
10. know thy audience, what messaging do you want to give, what messaging do you hope they digest, and tailor it, don't talk about stuff that 80% of the people don't care about, you're wasting people's time.
11. the good ol' status meeting, everyone and their mother attends to get a feel for what others are working on, but has absolutely no pertinence to what i need to get done or have done. really keep things high level, this is not your chance to voice your opinion, or give people the illusion that you're busy. just talk about the high level points, if you have stuff to resolve, don't do it in the meeting, do it offline, ahead of the meeting.
12. prepare well for meetings, i used to think that i could just waltz in and improvise, no, you need to prepare well, if you have a 1h meeting with 5 people, that's 6h of company time being spent, almost a full person day spent. you better be ready and you better get to the point.
13. be on time, every minute wasted is amplified by the number of people waiting. i usually issue punishment for the ones that come in late, sometimes just the latest, sometimes everyone who's late, buy coffee, do pushups, whatever it is.
14. i have a no phone and laptop policy in my meetings, sure you could be one of those new fangled flower power children that like to take notes on ipad/surface, or evernote on your laptop, but don't do that. you should, however, bring in a paper notebook. i know you have photographic memory, but bring that notebook, means you're well prepared and expecting something out of the meeting. i had a friend that brought his laptop to play nba live to his harvard law school class. i also had this senior director during a 3 on 1 interview doodle penises on his laptop while the candidate was talking. there's potential for a lot of mistrust in these circumstances. i think for the meeting owner to project onto a screen is obviously fine, but there's nothing concealed. assholes that answer phone calls or email during my meetings, unless you're sre/devops, should be banned from meetings. the goal should be to get out of the meeting as quickly as possible, everyone focused, if you cannot focus then things will drag on.
15. avoid meetings if possible...