Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#11

Post by drewcoo »

tldr: There are many kinds of meetings. This article doesn't even really cover the work involved in the kinds of meetings it's covering.

There are different reasons to have a meeting. This kind is the "present shit" kind of meeting. In that case, you can pretty much just email the material out and skip the meeting. Everyone gets an hour of their lives back. Win!

Or is this actually about the "get buy-in" meeting? Maybe. In that case, you lobby every person who will be in the meeting beforehand so that you know you'll get them all to consensus. And set aside time in the meeting for a Festivus-style "airing of the grievances". Make sure everyone is heard and then make sure everyone sees that they all agree with whatever decision is being made. Win!

If anyone actually starts arguing about semantics or other people's positions, the meeting is fucked. Adjourn, rethink, and try again after some legwork or with a different approach. Don't even bother with the "I want to show my anger to the group and nobody else matters" stuff in a meeting. That wastes everyone's time and makes everyone angry. Also, if it's your meeting everyone will remember that you let it go into a tailspin.

There are other kinds of meetings, too. Like the aspirational presentation followed by the call to action (great with an actual example of the thing in action at the company already), for example. This article doesn't seem to be about those, so I'll hold my tongue.

Meetings should be as short and engaging as possible, letting everyone make/save face and getting them all in line. Most of the work involved is before the meeting ever happens. Get the result you want by knowing how everyone will act/react in the meeting and setting the whole thing in motion before everyone's sitting at the table.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#12

Post by jacques_chester »

tome wrote: post #9
jacques_chester wrote: post #3

It's fascinating how much of this is a reinvention of classic meeting technique. "Define the objective of the meeting" --> Have an agenda. "Identify who is driving" --> Have a Chairman (Chairwoman, Chairperson, Facilitator, whatever). "Assign someone to take notes" --> Have a Secretary. "Summarize key action items, deliverables and points of accountability" --> Publish minutes of the meeting. I used to be involved in…

I'd be tempted to add * Set an ironclad time limit, no longer than 1 hour.

Or make it uncomfortable. Meetings of Queen Elizabeth with the UK's Privy Council are conducted standing up to prevent them from running too long, a custom that began in 1861. (During that dark time before the agile manifesto was signed and history was rebooted).

It takes advantage of a simple exploit: if the Monarch is standing, nobody present may sit down, unless they are bodily incapable of standing. Queen Victoria didn't like long meetings, so she stood up to ensure they would be brief.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#13

Post by sliverstorm »

drewcoo wrote: post #11

tldr: There are many kinds of meetings. This article doesn't even really cover the work involved in the kinds of meetings it's covering. There are different reasons to have a meeting. This kind is the "present shit" kind of meeting. In that case, you can pretty much just email the material out and skip the meeting. Everyone gets an hour of their lives back. Win! Or is this actually about the "get buy-in" meeting? May…

There's yet another kind of meeting; the recurring team meeting. Purpose being to get everybody in the same room to discuss whatever is on people's minds.

(This is obviously a type of meeting that needs to be used lightly)

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#14

Post by jacques_chester »

bane wrote: post #7

I've found that the person running a meeting really defines the success/utility of a meeting. Some bad practices I've learned from: a) Instead of making a simple decision, plan a meeting, at that meeting plan other meetings. This Dilbert pointy haired boss-style really happened at a very large corporation I once worked at. I actually thought it was a joke the first few times it happened. Ultimately the simple decisio…

> Open actions need to be brought up again, this time with a note that it's a repeat x number of times. The more times it repeats, the higher up in priority it goes. If it doesn't move up in priority, it's probably not real anyway and shouldn't have been an action to start with

Hey, I wish I'd known about this one. I had items that lingered for weeks, sometimes. Maybe a rule like "4 repeats and it gets dropped". That said, a countervailing rule of thumb is that every action belongs to someone. If they get too many repeats, it's time to find out why.

I agree with c), that meeting techniques can have a dark side if you go off the deep end and place means above ends which my glowing description elsewhere did not present. However, lots of people don't realise the utility of the fusty old rules. When they are used as a backstop for judicious chairmanship, they speed things up.

It's a spectrum. At one end is chaos and wasted time and "because I said so". At the other end is stultifying rigidity and Brazil and "it's stupid, but I must adhere to this minute inconsequential rule or I'm pretty sure the universe will stop".

In the middle there is a nice median. That's where people should aim to be.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#15

Post by jacques_chester »

bane wrote: post #8
jacques_chester wrote: post #3

It's fascinating how much of this is a reinvention of classic meeting technique. "Define the objective of the meeting" --> Have an agenda. "Identify who is driving" --> Have a Chairman (Chairwoman, Chairperson, Facilitator, whatever). "Assign someone to take notes" --> Have a Secretary. "Summarize key action items, deliverables and points of accountability" --> Publish minutes of the meeting. I used to be involved in…

> If there is an ironclad guarantee that agenda will be followed come hell or high water, then only folk who are required at a meeting will show up. That's a really interesting technique I might try one of these days. I'm actually of the opinion that I want people to attend the meetings anyways since they might be informed even if they don't participate.

Right. But this can usually be achieved with agenda and well-written minutes. People who are good at the secretarial role are force multipliers for meetings.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#16

Post by qznc »

Two suggestions from my experience with links to my blog for more extensive descriptions.

Send out a questionnaire before to discover hidden assumptions. http://beza1e1.tuxen.de/articles/questionnaire_meeting.html

Use Etherpad to rewrite the agenda into a protocol live and cooperatively. http://beza1e1.tuxen.de/articles/meeting.html

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#17

Post by edent »

I use a meeting ticker sometimes - one like this: http://tobytripp.github.io/meeting-ticker/

Set a low ball hourly rate - so £50 (depending on where you are and who you're with) so that people suspect the meeting actually costs more.

When it comes to the end of the meeting, you say "Did this meeting produce £376.42 worth of value for the company?"

If the answer is "yes" - you're doing something right. If the answer is "no" - hold a meeting to discuss how to become more productive in meetings.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#18

Post by tome »

jacques_chester wrote: post #12
tome wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be tempted to add * Set an ironclad time limit, no longer than 1 hour.

Or make it uncomfortable. Meetings of Queen Elizabeth with the UK's Privy Council are conducted standing up to prevent them from running too long, a custom that began in 1861. (During that dark time before the agile manifesto was signed and history was rebooted). It takes advantage of a simple exploit: if the Monarch is standing, nobody present may sit down, unless they are bodily incapable of standing. Queen Victori…

Yes stand-up meetings are a great idea.

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#19

Post by Spooky23 »

sliverstorm wrote: post #13
drewcoo wrote: post #11

tldr: There are many kinds of meetings. This article doesn't even really cover the work involved in the kinds of meetings it's covering. There are different reasons to have a meeting. This kind is the "present shit" kind of meeting. In that case, you can pretty much just email the material out and skip the meeting. Everyone gets an hour of their lives back. Win! Or is this actually about the "get buy-in" meeting? May…

There's yet another kind of meeting; the recurring team meeting. Purpose being to get everybody in the same room to discuss whatever is on people's minds. (This is obviously a type of meeting that needs to be used lightly)

True Story: I got chastised in my annual performance review because I didn't have a scheduled staff meeting for my 5-person team.

I've always found meetings like that to be useless, but I guess there was some official policy someone that stated "thou shalt haveth staff meetings".

Re: A Simple Rule to Eliminate Useless Meetings

#20

Post by hbhanu »

jacques_chester wrote: post #12
tome wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be tempted to add * Set an ironclad time limit, no longer than 1 hour.

Or make it uncomfortable. Meetings of Queen Elizabeth with the UK's Privy Council are conducted standing up to prevent them from running too long, a custom that began in 1861. (During that dark time before the agile manifesto was signed and history was rebooted). It takes advantage of a simple exploit: if the Monarch is standing, nobody present may sit down, unless they are bodily incapable of standing. Queen Victori…

Surprisingly effective. :)
Post reply on HN