The Leadership Industry has a lot of complicated and confusing models about “Meetings” – categories, types and why they’re held. Most of these are about as useful as the instruction manual for your microwave oven.
There’s only one ultimate purpose for Meetings in organizations.
The ultimate and only true purpose for Meetings are the Decisions that lead from them.
This doesn’t sound right, but think about it – the visible benefit (for the organization) from Meetings is in the quality of decisions made as a result of whatever happened during those meetings. Good or bad.
The key difference between types of meetings is when, how and by whom those decisions get made.
Sometimes those decisions are taken long after the meeting was held.
Sometimes they’re small things made in secret or unconsciously.
The easiest meetings to define the benefit of are those in which actual decisions are reached in the meeting. That’s why they’re normally the most satisfying, (at least when good decisions are made)These are also a minority of meetings held.
A second group of meetings lead to clear decisions in defined topics later. These can be satisfying or frustrating but at least their purpose is usually clear.
The third much larger group of meetings have less clear purpose but also influence later decisions. These are sometimes passed off as “information “ meetings and can be the most frustrating or boring types, especially if those ultimate decisions aren’t made clear.
They can also be motivational or inspirational- which can lead to unpredictable and unrelated decisions later.
“The ultimate purpose of Meetings are the Decisions that lead from them…”
On the other hand a meeting can be traumatic or upsetting and again lead to later decisions- not always what the meeting leader intended.
Of course most meetings are never a single type but a mixture of all types. We usually experience all 3 types in a single “meeting “.
A “decision “ meeting has lots of moments of motivation, demotivation, information, inspiration etc apart from the formal agenda.
The key point is that, whether you intend it or not, meetings will always influence decisions. Either positively or not.
Once you realize this your attitude to meetings should change.
They have a collective long term effect beyond the topics covered in individual meetings.
This is why behavior, and structure of, meetings can be more important than the topic, or even the immediate outcome.
Are your meetings helping grow people or control them?
Are new or risky ideas welcomed?
Are your meetings clearly linked to the team’s objectives and priorities?
Is information shared based on facts or opinions?
Do your meetings connect over time to form a longer dialogue or do topics constantly change?
Does behavior in your meeting cause later decisions which reinforce the decisions agreed in the meeting or undermine them?
As a leader do you just attend meetings, or shape them to maximize the success of the team?
More to come…
.
Actually in any meeting I have been in the outcome was already predetermined from the outset and the actual meeting usually is a redundant process.
Interesting – & frustrating I assume. Sounds like the decision makers don’t need input just agreement?