Illustration by Robin Good
“Meetings are indispensable when you don’t want to do anything.”
Economist John
Kenneth Galbraith
“Meetings have become so tainted that they now go by a host of other names,” wrote Jared Sandberg in the Wall Street Journal recently. “They’re dubbed briefings (meetings that last longer than intended), seminars (expensive meetings with handouts), presentations (meetings preceded and followed by many other meetings), videoconferences (meetings with technical difficulties) and conference calls (meetings with eye-rolling).”
Author Patrick M. Lencioni went so far as to write a book titled “Death by Meeting” which sat atop many best-selling business books lists. It tells a fictional tale of one manager whose career is almost derailed by bad meetings. Lencioni’s take: “The monotony of sitting through an uninspired staff meeting, conference call or two-day off site would have to rank right up there with the most painful activities of modern business culture. And when we consider that most of the people struggling through those meetings do indeed have other things to do, that pain is only amplified.”
“Football is a
mistake. It
combines the two worst elements of American life.
Violence and committee meetings.”
Journalist George F. Will
School of Business alumnus Chad Brown, BBA ’01, says he has found that technology has only made it more difficult to have productive meetings. “Now that we are a completely wireless workforce, the ability to have your Blackberry, cell phone and laptop all running during meetings can be extremely distracting. The ability to get sidetracked by another person seems to be directly related to the number of people in the room. The larger the group, the more likely you’ll see eyes browsing down to their screens and shooting out emails or instant messages during meetings. We’re all guilty of it — we just never want to be the person who gets called on to comment on something while we’re busy checking the Brewers’ box score or emailing a quick update to our boss!”
Considering how common business meetings are and how much most people dislike them, it’s surprising the lack of attention the subject has received in business schools. “There’s remarkably little research and theory on meetings, per se,” said Management Professor Ramon J. (Ray) Aldag. “Maybe meetings are just seen as too plebian, but they are tremendously important.”
Aldag devotes considerable attention to managing teams and running team meetings in the book, “Mastering Management Skills,” (See excerpt opposite page). Professor Aldag met recently with UPDATE to explore our love/hate relationship with meetings and whether there are ways to improve them.
Professor Ray Aldag
So, why do we need meetings, anyway?
That’s a good question. One reason, of course, is to get input from people. You could do that in other ways but typically people feel more comfortable giving suggestions when they hear other people’s ideas. Some people are just afraid to proactively give opinions. Another reason is the sense of participation, that people actually coming together in a meeting really do feel they are participating more than they might if they were just asked to fill out a questionnaire.
Meetings might be needed to make sure people have common understandings that they indeed know the things their leaders assume they know. It’s a chance to clarify and communicate information and get feedback. I would argue, though, that you should always ask that question; “Do we need this meeting?” In many cases things can be done in other ways without taking people’s time. It’s a big investment which is why, if you are going to run a meeting, I think you should take it seriously and run it properly and give it some forethought.
“People often leave meetings believing there
is agreement
when there
really isn’t.”
Why are so many meetings so bad?
Many meetings are called when no meeting should be called. Maybe all you need to do is to disseminate the information by email. A lot of meetings are done to give a sense that something is being accomplished. Another reason is simply that people just don’t plan for meetings and don’t give structure to meetings. A lot of people in leadership roles running the meeting are reluctant to provide structure because they think it looks like they are dominating, but they are not—they are providing structure. And by giving structure that allows people to fully participate. Because if they don’t give that structure, some people will dominate the process and others will sit back and never say anything. There’s a lot of uncertainly when people go to meetings. People come in and they are asking questions like, “Why am I here? What are we supposed to do? Who are these other people? What do they know? Do they know more than me?” And they ask questions of themselves. “Is this a real meeting? Or are we just here to give legitimacy to a decision that’s already been made?”
How to Structure a
Successful Meeting
- Distribute an agenda to all members prior to the meeting.
- Start by reviewing progress to date and establishing the task of the meeting.
- Early in the meeting, get a report from each member who had a preassigned task.
- Manage the discussion to encourage fair participation:
- Establish norms for fair participation. For example, state early in the meeting, “Let’s make sure we all have a chance to make our views known. I hope we’ll all feel free to speak up, but also that we’ll let others have their say.”
- Provide guiding comments. If someone has been dominating the process, say something to the effect of, “Janet, I think you’ve done a good job of stating your position. Let’s see if someone else has any comments.” If someone hasn’t been contributing, say something like, “Donna, is there anything you’d like to add?” Often people are anxious to make a point but are reluctant to say anything unless directly asked to participate.
- Use a round-robin process, directly asking each member to give comments in turn.
- Ask members to write down their ideas. This technique is more likely to result in unique, clearly stated ideas.
- At the end of the meeting, summarize what was accomplished, where the group is on schedule and the team’s task at the next meeting.
- Make each member’s assignment for the next meeting clear—and public.
From the book, “Mastering Management Skills” by Ramon (Ray) J. Aldag and Loren Kuzahara. Aldag is a professor of management and human resources at the UW-Madison School of Business, where he holds the Glen A. Skillrud Family Chair in Business and serves as executive director of the Weinert Center for Entrepreneurship. Kuzahara is a teaching professor in management and human resources at the School of Business.
Technology is changing everything else about business, why hasn’t it changed meetings more?
Well, you do have technology being used in new ways for meetings—in terms of conference calls and videoconferences. And some companies, like IBM, are making use of sophisticated electronic meeting technologies such as GroupSystems. But they are the exception. There’s still a considerable investment needed to use that kind of technology.
If you are trapped in a frustrating meeting led by someone else, what can you do?
If the leader isn’t providing proper guidance you can ask questions. What are the constraints of the group? When do we have to have things done? What are our roles? Are we to make the final decision or serve as an advisory committee—that’s often not made clear. People in the meeting can make guiding comments, “I’d like to hear what John has to say.” Or, “Why don’t we go around the room and have everyone give a suggestion?” Most of the things a group leader can do, a group member can do, especially if you are trying to get other people’s comments.
How important is being able to run a good meeting to being a good manager?
I’d say it’s quite important. Not just knowing how to run the meeting, but whether you should have a meeting and what kind of meeting you should have, whether it’s an interactive meeting or uses a structured group process. Managers spend a tremendous amount of time in meetings. Not just with direct reports, but with peers, crossfunctional teams and people at higher levels in the organization, so meeting skills can be very valuable.
Which would you suggest to improve meetings?
It’s important to have good records of meetings.
It’s important not just to focus on agreement but also to focus on constructive disagreement. Make sure people feel comfortable voicing concerns. After all, the goal is to come up with a good solution. If there is a weakness, we don’t want our customers or our competitors to find it. We want to deal with it first. Having someone play the role of devil’s advocate can be valuable.
People often leave meetings believing there is agreement when there really isn’t. That’s one reason it’s helpful to have breaks in meetings. People will sit in meetings agreeing. You take a break and people get together one-on-one and discover they aren’t the only ones to have a concern that hasn’t been voiced. Often, they then feel comfortable going back into the meeting to express that concern.
People are typically very frustrated by meetings. They think they are a bad use of their time. They aren’t happy with the product. They aren’t going to implement the decision with any enthusiasm at all. For very important decisions, I recommend adding further structure by using formal group processes. One such process, the Nominal Group Technique, uses a series of steps to get a wide range of inputs from group members, ensure that all suggestions are properly considered and arrive at a group decision. I taught the Nominal Group Technique to executives in China in May, and they were quickly able to use it to deal with major issues their group was facing.
Meetings do give a sense of involvement and participation. They provide a chance to exchange opinions, especially if there is a climate of psychological safety, if people really feel they can say what they want to say and not be punished for it. I’ve been in lots of meetings where it was clear that if someone said something negative they would be punished for it. If people’s comments are greeted with “Yes, but,” that’s going to stifle dialogue.
So, can we hope that someday someone will find a cure for the common cold and a cure for the common meeting?
The danger is they may have a meeting to find the cure.
Lari Fanlund is the editor of UPDATE magazine.
How can meetings be improved? Share your thoughts at alumni@bus.wisc.edu and read those of other School of Business alumni online.
Executive Education offers a Certificate in Basic Management that includes a three-day program on Improving Communications Skills that includes suggestions on effective meetings. For more information, go to www.uwexeced.com/basicmanagement.