Source: http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/images/Effective_Meeting_Agenda/quickagenda1.jpg

“How would you facilitate this meeting about critical topics?” That’s a question that pops into my head when I’m sitting in a meeting where no agenda has been set, I’m not even sure why I’m present or what the objectives of the meeting discussion are to be.  Although I have greater control over the meetings I attend and facilitate now, I occasionally find myself in meetings where there is no pay-off ahead…the meeting is aimless, endless and needlessly open-ended.

This article–quoted and cited below–attracted me because it offered a clearly articulated meeting structure. Over time, I’ve seen and tried several different formats. During my meetings, I’m using a modified one from Patrick Lencioni’s “Death by Meeting” book. In fact, it’s probably a degenerative version since the first version included the following:

Part 1 – Sharing Priorities: We go around the room and each team member shares what their priorities are for the week.

Part 2 – Agenda Development: We go around the room and add items to the agenda, which is either typed on a computer whose screen is projected to the wall or it’s written on a whiteboard with the person’s initials next to it and items are crossed off as we complete discussion about them.

The revised, degenerative version is simply Part 2. I’ve found that Part 1 results in LONG meetings that could be better handled elsewhere. Our team meetings are about making decisions and less about finding out what everyone else is doing. Focusing on items that we need to make decisions about allows the meeting to be more focused and move along faster than everyone bringing the kitchen-sink to the table. 

If I encounter an item that needs MY decision and the course ahead is not clear, then I have to step back and allow myself to reflect on the solution over time, sharing my decision later with the involved supervisor and team members. This takes the pressure off me from delivering an instant decision, poorly considered and based on the dynamics of the current situation (which can get tense when you’re having a “fierce conversation”). Getting time to reflect also allows me to tap into my professional learning network (PLN) and solicit opinions about how others have done things. That way, I know if the decision is going to go with or against the mass of “public opinion” or “best practices.” Sometimes, it’s good to go against, but for policy decisions, going with the crowd makes it easier.

Smaller, ad-hoc meetings are held between a supervisor, team member, and I so we can review what individual team member’s priorities are in the context of what goals the supervisor has for a project. Of course, the supervisor’s goals initially came from me, but the project is usually enhanced from what I originally imagined for it…that has to happen because I have incredibly talented team members who often come up with solutions I can articulate but can’t necessarily implement (for example, we need a more approachable web site…the how of which is something they have designed).

As best I can tell, this approach is working. Yet in the past, I often asked myself “How could we make these meetings more productive?” To that end, I would ask team members to submit agenda items. This was not that effective because we’d end up discussing everything we were working on, and parameters would change that did not need to change.

So, you can imagine that the article below resonated with some of what we’re doing, but also offered some suggestions for improvement…liked the timed mini-meetings within the context of a larger team meeting. I can see how that would be helpful in a large organization, but extraneous in one with 6 team members where ad-hoc meetings work.

As you reflect on this blog entry and the article below, please consider sharing how YOU organize meetings or how others you work with do so.

• How to Run a Meeting Like Google
  • How to Run a Meeting Like Google
  • No one wastes time searching for a purpose at Marissa Mayer’s meetings—even five-minute gatherings must have a clear agenda
  • (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/19/06, “Marissa Mayer: The Talent Scout”).
  • Mayer holds an average of 70 meetings a week and serves as the last stop before engineers and project managers get the opportunity to pitch their ideas to Google’s co-founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page. Eight teams consisting of directors, managers, and engineers—all at various stages of product development—answer to Mayer.
  • Mayer’s six keys to running successful meetings follow:
  • 1. Set a firm agenda.
    Mayer requests a meeting agenda ahead of time that outlines what the participants want to discuss and the best way of using the allotted time.
  • It helps all those involved to focus on what they are really trying to achieve and how best to reach that goal.
  • 2. Assign a note-taker.
  • On one wall, a projector displays the presentation, while right next to it, another projector shows the transcription of the meeting. (Yet another displays a 4-foot image of a ticking stopwatch.) Google executives are big believers in capturing an official set of notes, so inaccuracies and inconsistencies can be caught immediately.
  • 3. Carve out micro-meetings.
    Mayer sets aside large blocks of time that she slices into smaller, self-contained gatherings on a particular subject or project.
  • This method offers enough flexibility to modify the agenda just before the meeting, should anything pressing occur. It also instills discipline that keeps the meeting tightly focused. Mayer does the same with members of her teams who might need only five or 10 minutes of her time instead of 30 minutes—the shortest block of time her calendar permits. By setting aside micro-meetings within a larger block of time, she accomplishes more.
  • 4. Hold office hours.
  • Employees add their name to a board outside her office, and she sees them on a first-come, first-serve basis.
  • 5. Discourage politics, use data.
    One of Mayer’s “Nine Notions of Innovation” is “Don’t politic, use data” (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/19/06, “9 Notions of Innovation”).
  • This idea can and should apply to meetings in organizations in which people feel as though the boss will give the green light to a design created by the person he or she likes the best, showing favoritism for the individual instead of the idea.

    Mayer believes this mindset can demoralize employees, so she goes out of her way to make the approval process a science. Google chooses designs on a clearly defined set of metrics and how well they perform against those metrics. Designs are chosen based on merit and evidence, not personal relationships.

    Mayer discourages using the phrase “I like” in design meetings, such as “I like the way the screen looks.” Instead, she encourages such comments as “The experimentation on the site shows that his design performed 10% better.” This works for Google, because it builds a culture driven by customer feedback data, not the internal politics that pervade so many of today’s corporations.

  • 6. Stick to the clock.
    To add a little pressure to keep meetings focused, Google gatherings often feature a giant timer on the wall, counting down the minutes left for a particular meeting or topic. It’s literally a downloadable timer that runs off a computer and is projected 4 feet tall.
  • Mayer does have one caveat when it comes to the timer—maintain a healthy sense of humor about it.
  • Gallo is a Pleasanton (Calif.)-based corporate presentation coach and former Emmy Award-winning TV journalist. He’s the author of the book 10 Simple Secrets of the World’s Greatest Business Communicators. Visit him online at www.carminegallo.com

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.