For me, a remarkable meeting shows respect to all of the attendees (a non-negotiable), but it also goes beyond that. It's creative, interactive, and, in some cases, leaderless. Most meetings are monologues or uncreative in their use of technology and media. I like having an predefined outcome/goal, but sometimes that can be as simple as saying, "We're going to discover X" in this meeting.

For me, a meeting is a success if people want to come back to the next one. We do evaluations at the end of each meeting, and this keeps my humble. Some are great; some, not so much. I experiment with giving the floor to different speakers/facilitators, and we're learning together how to makes these times more valuable.

Other than Lencioni, who else would you recommend?

1) an explicit outcome/purpose in the Meeting Request

2) an agenda at least 24 hours prior to the meeting with clear indication of who is responsible for taking and forwarding the notes within 24 hours after the meeting

The consequence of violating either of these Mandates could be as simple as people declining the Meeting Request.

From my perspective, the only valid purposes for meetings are to debate (and possibly then to make a decision), to brainstorm, to celebrate positive accomplishments, and to acknowledge major negative developments and brainstorm course corrections. Meetings should never be used just to communicate information or build relationships.

Most workers can quickly identify their co-workers who seem to think that nothing can get done without discussing it in a meeting first. While there are legitimate reasons for gathering people together (as stated above), far too often the little that is actually accomplished in a meeting could have been done in more efficient ways. Information could be communicated via email. Relationships could be built over lunch or a round of golf. Socializing could happen at more appropriate times in more appropriate places.

The other dysfunctional aspect of many meetings is the strange manifestation known as the “presentation.” Any vital information (other than surprise announcements) contained in a presentation should be sent in an email at least 24 hours in advance so that participants have time to review and research prior to the meeting. Then the meeting should consist of a quick debate or brainstorming session by informed participants. Vital information can be put on screen, but there is no need for that information to be presented—people need to be trusted to have done their homework.

Perhaps the most frustrating thing about meetings is that many of the people involved know they could be using that time to get their prioritized Tasks done so that they can have more time for other important things (at work or elsewhere). If the organization clearly supports best practices such as those outlined above, workers should be able to reclaim considerable time to do just that.

In any meeting where conversation and decisions are involved our group also follows the advice of St Benedict in his C6th “Little Rule for Beginners”, Chapter Three – “concerning the calling of the brethren to council”.

Benedict’s main points are that the leader’s role is to facilitate a conversation in which:

1) every person is heard, even the most junior

2) the matter must be clarified,

3) everyone to seek first to understand the matter in hand

4) each one speaks to the group’s purpose not out of a purely personal agenda

5)the leader facilitates the drawing of a conclusion and the putting forward of a proposal for the group to own and act upon

6) the right of the leader is reserved to ‘lead from the front’ and act on his own judgment. However Benedict’s strong advice is always to seek counsel before making a decision and as rarely as possible to act outside of the group’s conclusions. Benedict takes this as a tool for safeguarding God’s timing in important matters.

We find all this still incredibly relevant. It may be relevant even to team meetings at ThomasNelson?!

Thanks Again,

Paul Wallis