Meetings are…

After last week’s post, I had the opportunity to conduct some training with an amazing group of leaders, and they got to work through different levels of thinking (Vision, Strategy, Execution).  In their simulated executive-level meeting, some got quiet and withdrew, while others got loud and wanted to make sure that they and their opinions were heard. It was fascinating and made me think about meeting dynamics.  Not long ago, I saw a hilarious demotivational poster about meetings that many people would agree with.  

One aspect that will make different levels of thinking increasingly impactful is creating meetings that aim specifically at different levels of thinking.  Pat Lencioni wrote an amazing book called Death By Meeting.  In the book, Lencioni claims that teams that embrace a disciplined meeting rhythm can overcome the common frustrations associated with meetings, leading to improved collaboration, better decision-making, and ultimately a more productive and cohesive organizational culture. 

Justin Hale and Joseph Grenny wrote an awesome article about meeting engagement in Harvard Business Review that explains four broad reasons for having meetings.  They propose that meetings should be conducted to influence others, make decisions, solve problems, or strengthen relationships.   

As leaders, we need to see that passive meeting participation is minimized.  People should be in meetings to contribute, not just to listen. A meeting probably isn’t the best delivery method if we need to share information.  Creating different levels of thinking and then building meeting focus to a level and a purpose will magnify impact. Building and trusting your people to make decisions and solve problems will grow your capacity and ability.  

What do you think the best and worst parts of meetings are?