

Meetings suck. Okay, that’s a bit strong. Meetings only suck most of the time, the other times they stink. On the odd occasion meetings don’t suck or stink.
Why such a strong reaction you ask? Well – it’s simple. For too long I’ve been terrorized by poorly run meetings led by people who have no clue what they’re doing. They’ve wasted my time and I hate that. But what’s worse is that I know for a fact I’ve led crappy meetings and have wasted other people’s time. There’s no safe place to hide on this one. Over the years I’ve felt like I’ve been able to make some decent strides towards a healthier, more productive meeting environment but I still get this nagging, irritated feeling every time I sit down with a group of people “to meet”. Ultimately, it comes down to taking control of your own part and managing your role as best as you can.
Now, keep in mind I’ve been an independent business owner for about 7 years so I am constantly jumping in/out of projects, teams, companies, and organizations. I don’t have much to say on the “regular” meeting stuff. Over the years I’ve seen creative service providers take a back seat during meetings with their clients or collaborators and I just have to say something. I want to help. But first, I need to argue my case… so, here’s a bit of a rant for all you meeting haters:
- Most meetings take place because someone wants to give or receive an update on tasks. That’s not a great justification for a meeting because the flow of information is unidirectional. There are other ways to transfer information – it’s called a fax machine, hello? Hehe.
- Meetings are often way too long! I like how it’s worded in the book ReWork (by Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson – 37Signals): why schedule a 1 hour meeting when 8-minutes are all that’s required. Get to the point and move on!
- The meeting is called because there’s some slackers in the group and the boss wants to get everyone back on track. Don’t be a slacker and don’t subject yourself to working with slackers if you can help it. Besides, berating or embarrassing people in front of their peers doesn’t improve motivation, and it wastes everyone else’s time.
- Meetings seem like a good place to clear up a disagreement – but that’s bogus. If there’s a difference of opinion about a project, stakeholders should approach each other individually and find ways to move forward. In a group setting there’s a bit of a gang mentality and that’s just not cool.
- Meeting to build excitement is stupid. Motivation is a daily management challenge, not a one-time fix. Private conversations are better, but something social is ideal. A pint after work, a spontaneous coffee run, a small gift, or quick encouraging phone call are better than a meeting.
There are so many inefficiencies and liabilities that can stem from meetings. For every great idea that surfaces in a meeting I’d venture a guess that about a hundred die a quick death. For every ounce of energy we apply to being effective, I believe meetings kill-off 1-ton of productivity.
We can do this differently people.
The truth is I have very few traditional meetings. I prefer to process the details of project online – that’s what Smartsheet is for. Most of my face-to-face meetings with clients, prospects, or collaborators take place over coffee or pint and have nothing to do with agendas or deliverables, but they’re invaluable to my work. When I meet with someone in a less-formal setting we’re building trust and developing camaraderie. Besides, new ideas tend to struggle in a boardroom.
That being said, I’m cool with the idea of chairs, tables, WiFi, and especially a whiteboard just as long as the vision and intent for the meeting is clear. And, from what I’ve seen, the biggest concern from a business perspective is that entrepreneurs don’t consider meetings as billable and therefore the prep time, and the face-to-face time, are a blow to their earning potential. The way to extract more value for yourself is to setup some parameters and expectations of the meetings you’re involved with. So, here’s a un-suck ideas regarding the good, old-fashioned meetANG:
- Before agreeing to a project include a request for a meeting schedule or provide your own schedule, one that fits your calendar. Pre-scheduled meetings are very successful at limiting the emergency or the single issue meetings.
- Book something immediately following the scheduled meeting so that you have a hard-stop and make sure everyone knows it before the meeting starts (don’t be a clank about it though – if you act like you’re uber-popular, in demand, or “the poo” then you’re an idiot). In lieu of a good agenda this hard-stop has a tendency to push the important items up to the beginning of the meeting leaving the silly details for the end which you have to politely excuse yourself from, there’s nothing wrong with a bit of urgency on their part.
- Work at being the best meeting attendee ever! Whether in person or on the phone, rock every meeting with a great attitude and be solutions-oriented. And be early or at least on time. When you’re late you’re not entering the meeting from a position of strength.
- End each meeting with a summary of YOUR action items (verbal is best, writing them down is a must). Don’t worry about everyone else just make sure everyone knows that you’ve got things covered. If someone says, “Can you email that to me” tell them “Why, didn’t you take notes?” Or, just say – no.
- If you’re the meeting leader then focus on being a totally awesome meeting initiator and facilitator. When you create an exciting culture around meeting with you clients, prospects and collaborators will be motivated to work with you. Bringing candy or cookies is the old standby but I’m sure you can come up with something awesomer. Maybe there’s a location that’s inspiring or a new way you can plan the agenda or setup so that it gives attendees a fresh look at things.
- Leaders should send a very clear meeting invitation with all the important details. I’m a big fan of Outlook/iCal meeting requests because they keep me organized but it can be a quick email or text-message too. Include a quick agenda or some goals for the session. Try to schedule meetings at least a week out. The more time the better. A quick reminder to the attendees 36-hr prior is a good idea too.
- Keep it short! If you have re-occurring meetings with the same people then try shortening your next meeting and see how it goes. I know some software engineers whose team meeting is no longer than 18-min per week. That’s awesome.
- Chillax on the updates and reports. They take forever and accomplish very little. If they’re important to the context of the group/project then have participants prepare 1 or 2 highlights/issues they’re focused on.
- Meetings should focus on action so plan agenda items that elicit discussion, interaction, dialogue, debate, and brainstorming. As soon as something concrete surfaces start looking for a person to assign it to develop further and then move on!
- Take discussion “off-line” when at all possible. Agenda items should be as group-specific as much as possible. If a small group or two people are entering into a discussion that only pertains to them encourage a separate meeting following the current one – immediately after is ideal.
These past few months I’ve been a part of some VERY successful meetings. Some meetings where short, some where long, some were online, and some were face-to-face. They energized me and were extremely productive. There’s no formula, but there is something to be said for managing the environment and outcomes of a meeting.
This post can also be found on CorwinHiebert.com.
Corwin Hiebert is a management and marketing consultant to creative entrepreneurs (like world-renowned photographer and author David duChemin). He’s the co-publisher of Clamorate, and is the co-producer of CREATIVEMIX (Vancouver’s Ideation Conference). As an educator, speaker, and author, Corwin is an avid supporter of creative risk-takers. Corwin is passionate about helping creative people take action towards their goals and their dreams. You can learn more about working with Corwin on his blog or you can follow him on Twitter. He lives in Vancouver, Canada and drinks very unhealthy amounts of expensive coffee.






This is a great article Corwin. I work in an environment where they actually held a series of meetings to determine why we had so many meetings. In the end they hired individuals to attend the meetings on behalf of the actual attendees. Yes, full time employees who meet to this day. The result? Utter confusion not to mention a waste of money, time, and resources.
Your framework here is one that they could learn a valuable lesson from for sure. Of course, they would have to have the meeting people meet to hash out the concept.
Question for you. Do you think that the advent of the quality improvement movement of the 1990′s has harmed the notion that meetings may not be necessary all the time? It seems as though QI groups within organizations are quick to call meetings under the pretense that improvement requires that people meet. What are your thoughts on that?
Mike
Good question! @bekadel is probably a better guy to answer this question but from what I’ve seen, as budgets get strained or markets change and people’s jobs are on the line it appears that by calling meetings everyone is trying to hold tight to anything/everything and meetings are a great way to exert power and control when it fact it’s really just a defense mechanism. Some call it leadership but I call it macho mayhem: “My meeting is bigger than your meeting” “My meeting can kick your meetings’ butt!. Seriously though – ask Ben.
Oooo… I love being the loyal opposition on this one. I’ll start by saying that I’ve been an independent business person since 2000 and before that I worked in a department in a large university that had meetings to decide whether we should have a meeting about that… so I’ve seen both sides of the coin.
I’ll also add as a sort of full disclosure statement that I actually make a good chunk of money running other people’s meetings.
When we’re doing the re-think on meetings, we should focus on what meetings are really good for. At their best, meetings are a collaborative space where the thinking of the group is stronger and better than the thinking of any individual. When they are designed right, that’s what happens. People come away motivated because of the possibilities that they unleashed, not because of the pep talk or the cookies. (Coffee, however, is a must!)
For me, the key is pre-planning – like Corwin is saying, know exactly what the goal of the meeting is and then structure the meeting to do that. There are good techniques out there for how to actually DO a meeting – not a one-size fits all approach, but different ways, for example, of dealing with disagreements that avoid mob-mentality or idea generation that makes sure that the all ideas have a chance to live and be considered, but then kills the ones that deserve to be killed – not just the ones that people are scared of, etc. It’s actually one of those areas where it surprises me how much more people know about, say Skype or webconference technology than they know about effect techniques to organize collective work.
But I digress.
To answer your question Mike, TQM itself didn’t have a bad impact on meetings. TQM is just a symptom of larger cultural dysfunctions where people are running around looking for the “savior” – that silver bullet that’s going to fix everything without requiring effort or making anyone uncomfortable. If that’s the organizational culture, OF COURSE they’re going to have pointless meetings. But there are some places that used a TQM approach to actually restructure how they did meetings to be more effective. Like a lot of things, it’s not the tool – it’s how people choose to use it.
Thus endeth my rant. Thanks!
Ben
Well you two have RAWKED my world today. Thanks so much for the feedback on my question. Ben your point about working for a University. Guess what? I do. At least medical/laboratory portion of it. In a way I’m glad it’s not just us.
I was involved with our “TQM” (QI) program for over 10 years. Quit, because in the end it evolved into just another department. It didn’t start out that way.
At the core of quality improvement is the necessity of independence for its facilitators to act outside the the traditional framework of an organization. I was one of those facilitators and then one day we started reporting to someone who told us what our outcome would be for every suggested improvement. Not exactly movement in the correct direction with that.
Anyway, I moved off topic a little. Sorry. Do you guys have any thoughts on resources I might get and use to DO meetings correctly?
Thanks Again!
Mike