How to get your meeting started right with excellent introductory talking points.
Read MoreThe Devil Named Meetings
I love Chris Stapleton and his soulful, down-on-his-luck country songs. I can imagine a life filled with whisky, smoky bars, and life on the road but... Let's be real. His days are so different than mine. So just for fun on this pre-holiday, throw-away workday, I adjusted the lyrics below to better reflect my reality as a federal meeting facilitator.
This was done with a lot of love and respect for Chris and my cherished clients-- and apparently because I have nothing better to do. You can buy the real song and sing along here.
Big hugs and Happy Thanksgiving!
what are you talking about?
No, really. It's an honest question. What are you talking about?
I came across The Good Men Project during a typical click to click to click browsing session. I was curious to learn what was meant by "good men" and why the hell this too had to have the "project" bit at the end. (I think PMI's relentless marketing is to blame for the runaway use of this term for anything and everything people want to say, do, or explore on the Internet. Time for a universal find and replace!)
Anyway, I got sucked in and spent a good hour or so clicking around trying to understand what good men are talking about. Scanning the site, I saw stuff on social and family issues, professional challenges, and personal values. This are thoughts on how to raise good children, achieve work/life balance, and improve relationships.
I was surprised. I guess not surprised that men were talking about these things (after all there are men's opinions all over the place) but previously unaware that they were swapping views within a circle of other men.
Prior to coming across this site, I'd imagined that most man-to-man conversations (outside of work or direct father to son type stuff) were focused on sports, maybe a little politics, and on the one slow sports day each year, you might get a a calendar review that went something like, "I went to X, then ate Y, then sat in traffic back to X."
To my knowledge, no such site exists for women. In fact, women have been trying to un-have the conversation about what makes a "good woman" for more than 50 years now.
It made me wonder what people are talking about within their circles of same-ness. For me? I have a pretty good handle on running conversations among federal management consultants (procurement is broken), working moms (there's never enough time), and half-assed vegans (green smoothies count, right?)
Reflecting on what people are talking about with others they view most similar to them (in life stage, circumstance, interests, race, religion, and so on) provides a lot of insights into their worries and priorities. Understanding these ongoing conversations is important-- not so that we can parachute in to solve them-- but so that we can better understand each other, be more empathetic, and more helpful when the opportunity presents itself.
It's sometimes difficult to answer the question-- what's on your mind? To get to the same place we might instead ask, what are you talking about?
we need more words for meetings
There’s a rumor passed down from one Anthropology 101 class to the next each year. Eskimos have like 30 words for snow. Whether it’s true or not, the idea that communities come up with more descriptive terms for their most frequent events makes sense. It also makes sense that someone else who sees a snow a couple times a year would be baffled by this buffet. It’s just snow. Snow is snow.
Meetings are my snow. And, probably yours too.
Many of us work in a climate where the weekly forecast calls tons of meetings. They’re often back-to-back and sometimes go for days on end. Many are purposeless, energy-depleting endurance events and others have no value. It’s not news that meetings are unpopular.
But for someone who spends a lot of her time planning, attending, facilitating and following-up after meetings, this bad rep bums me out, man. I kinda like ‘em—especially the ones that are clear in the objective and when everyone is paying attention and participating.
Using the umbrella meeting label for any event calling for 2 or more people to communicate with each other is how meetings became comparable to unmedicated dental work. I’d argue that not all meetings are the same and the bad ones are ruining it for the rest. For example, conference, summit, gathering, and party are all meetings. These terms conjure up something specific with the expectation that something interesting will happen. Right?
On the flip side, here are a couple words that I think should be added to the lexicon that describe what we hate with more precision.
- Duck, duck, staff: When you go around the room and “tap” each person one at a time. Adding random selection to the typical, let’s-go-around-the-room update helps make sure everyone is paying attention.
- Monopo-me: Many gather at the request of one. Time is generously but begrudgingly donated to the cause making one person feel important and listened to. The real message heard? Me. Me. Me.
- Statusize: Like jazzercise but less strenuous. You’re not sure you actually accomplished anything but you showed up and there are points for that. Everyone does jazz hands at the ends because, well, it’s over.
- Strategery: Held annually because you’re supposed to or in crisis because you have to. These events have the build-up and the buzz words (strategic, innovative, creative, solution-oriented) but no real way to get there.
- Catch-up: Quick, casual and not time-sensitive. Just like the homonym suggests, you squeeze out what you can and don’t worry about what’s left in the packet. You have a dozen more in the glove compartment.
We should skim these dreaded events out of the pool and reserve the word “meeting” for those occasions when we get together with purpose, focus, and function.
Together, we can save meetings. Will you join me?
getting clear on roles
They say that good fences make good neighbors. Good fences at work make us focus—clarifying roles to keep the important and relevant issues in and everything else out.
From sweeping initiatives to mundane meetings, we all show up on any given day and assigned a roll that is one of three. These rolls are to unlock, propel or support the solution in motion. Knowing our role (and sticking to it) increases our impact while enabling others to play their part-- not to mention avoiding confusion, frustration, and disappointment. Let's break this down a bit...
- To unlock is to bring expertise to the problem, clarify the issues, and offer paths that work (or just might work). To be the unlock-er, you show up prepared-- armed with questions, with data, with anecdotes, with horror stories, whatever you need to get clear on the challenge so that you can credibly and confidently propose a solution and convince others to consider your options. The performance metric is binary. Will the solution work for now- yes or no?
- To propel is to apply all the kick-off, kick-start, kick-ass project management, list-making, and inspiration skills you can muster. With conviction, your job is to move the (already agreed-upon) solution forward, generating excitement and momentum along the way. The performance metric is binary. Is the project progressing for now- yes or no?
- To support is to show up, play as a team, coordinate, collaborate, and celebrate the little successes. With dedication and reliability, you embrace the processes and protocols. Like the others, the performance metric is binary. Are you getting your job done- yes or no?
We can all quickly recall occasions (probably from this morning) when the lack of fencing around these roles created a problem-- an avoidable problem heaped on top of the original one we were there to solve. One reason why we stumble over these roles is that they are ever-changing. Depending on the need, we're called upon to flex different skills. This is clearly easiest when you know what's expected.
So, the trick for whoever is in charge is to ascertain what's needed in the moment, line up who's right for what, communicate that expectation, and go. Rinse and repeat for the next issue.
the problems with project-focused organization units
Watching people swim laps is pretty boring. Some people are faster, some are slower. Most do some kind of flip turn, some cling to end to sneak in a couple of deep gasps before paddling back in the other direction. The lane ropes separately them are absolutely critical to maintaining order and ensuring everyone gets the basic “work” of their swim done.
Watching people (especially kids) play in the pool is totally different. It’s loud, a little chaotic, and unpredictable—swimmers disappear periodically under the water only to pop back up some place else. If someone thought to bring a raft or noodle, the ever-changing games are played just a little differently. Occasionally someone gets kicked in the head but still there are no ropes separating the swimmers. Those would defeat the purpose.
Our organizations are largely built to sustain lap swimming. There is a ton of work to do each day. We need clear focus and direction to get things done. However, few of our best organizational leaps forward cleanly fall within the boundaries of one division.
So every once in a while, an opportunity comes up at work that requires experts from different divisions—a chance to pull people from their organizational swim lanes into the big open pool to do something special. There, they’re all mixed together and suddenly need to rethink how they swim.
When cross-divisional opportunities come up (especially big, important ones), someone will often pipe up with the idea to create one big lane (a combined organizational unit). It idea is that they’re relieved of their regular swimming duties and allowed to focus on the new, new thing. These initiative or project-focused units are typically promised a new box on the org chart, a new hierarchy with new leadership positions, and is often shown reporting directly to someone very senior. The whole thing can be really attractive to those tapped to create something new, as well as, the leadership who thinks they’re buying progress, agility, and accountability.
The message is that this new project is important and we can’t trust the existing organizations to come together, get creative, collaborate, and work it out. After all, we need to get it done already. Right?
Well, sometimes these realignments absolutely make sense such as when the business model is fundamentally changing and certain services are no longer needed or will be outsourced.
Other times, these pop-up project-focused groups undermine the existing structure. Assuming that you’re not doing away with finance, communications or IT any time soon, projects that skim a few key resources from these functions create more problems than they solve.
- For one, the residual organizations feel robbed.
- Then, the new group spends a lot of time figuring out how to secure resources and be productive together.
- Lastly, the leadership is put into the position of defending and refereeing instead of enjoying watching actions get ticked off the list.
Alternatively, time is better spent helping existing organizations collaborate productively. A series of facilitated planning discussions focused on who does what and when can move projects forward faster and with fewer kicks in the head.
Planning to plan? Answer these 9 questions first
A client asked me this morning to review and comment on his organization’s strategic plan template. A template? Wait, what? After a bit of (polite) questioning, I learned that this client's organization director is asking several sub-units to draft strategic plans. Once completed, these plans will be rolled up into a master strategic plan.
I wanted to respond with something helpful but the thoughts racing through my mind went something like... "You can’t template a strategic plan. I mean, sure, there are a handful of broad headers that you could type up but to what end? Creating a template would exacerbate one of the biggest problems with our typical approaches to strategic planning. And that problem is more focus on the end document than the process of discovery, team building, creative thinking, and cross-discipline input.
Back to my client... he elaborated that he was looking for some thought-provoking questions to include in an annotated outline. The outline would be the basis of a strategic planning meeting agenda and would be during the session to facilitate discussion. Sigh. Ok, that makes sense. Based on his request, I jotted down some basic strategic planning guidelines and the kind of questions you should be asking of your team.
Before doing “save as” and creating your spanking new strategic plan file, set some time parameters. As arbitrary as they might seem, establishing short but reasonable boundaries around the effort is tremendously helpful to participants. Without sideboards, strategic planning can and will go on forever and eventually be crushed under its own weight So, I’d suggest that you set a deadline of about a week-- 2 max. Seriously. You (meaning all the participants in your organization) really do not need more time. Simple and clear beats perfect and polished.
Ok, here you go...
Problem Statement
- What are two problems we're trying to solve? (Sit back and enjoy the range of answers. Giving everyone 2 helps them focus and provides a little wiggle room)
- How do other comparable organizations describe the same or similar problem? (Include for a quick compare and contrast exercise.)
Current State and Desired End State
- Briefly describe where the organization stands today in the face of this problem.
- In an ideal world, where would you be and by when? Answering this question can and will consume most of the discussion. You can only include this question if there is a pretty good sense of the options. If the problem is truly unsolved, additional research and exploration is needed. A good meeting but just one step back. Another thing... Personally, I recommend that you keep the goals modest and the timelines relatively near-term. Multi-year strategic plans have very limited practical value.
Stakeholders and Customers
- Who or what is impacted by the problem? Try to name the biggies and cut people off before you get too far past 6-8.
- Within the organization, who owns the biggest pieces of trying to solve this? (Good list for pulling in future reviewers and collaborators)
- Who are you trying to please, support, engage, or help? These are your customers (even if you’re not “selling” anything.) Spend most of the time you have talking about this group then take another pass through your decisions and tweak from the customer’s point of view.
- Besides you, who outside of the organization cares about this outcome?
Opportunities and Limitations
- What events can you reasonable anticipate in the set time frame that you want to take advantage of or avoid. Keep it short and snappy.
- So what’s the path?
- Given all the thoughts above, provide some sense of the range of options considered. Which path best takes advantage of all of the resources at your disposal? This is your strategic path. Write this down—on paper if that’s easiest.
Evaluation Points
- What logical evaluation points along the path exist? Mark these roughly on your calendar and commit to a quick (less than 1 meeting) evaluation of how you’re doing.
Have fun with it. To me, one of the most commonly missed opportunities with strategic planning is that we all take it too seriously and limit input to only the coolest kids in the office. Lame. Instead, even the most modest effort to make it interesting, take some guesses, accept some risk, and integrate as many viewpoints as possible will make this different from the last time.
Oh and encourage participants/contributors not to get too hung up on the language and meaning of strategic. I’d say that a plan is strategic if it reflects multiple viewpoints and illuminates a path forward-- given the best information available at the time. A project plan would follow and describe the step-by-step once this approach is finalized.
Follow through or else
Strategic plans are like dust bunnies. They have a cute name but are an annoying reminder that there is something else we should be doing. They're amassed from the fur, fluff, and fuzz floating around and tend to reproduce in dark corners. Strategic plans are often the end goal of a long process with at least a meeting or two scheduled along the way.
Strategic planning meetings can be great but have limitations. Done well, they...
- Get everyone on the same basis of understanding around the problem to be solved
- Lay the foundation for some near-term decisions the leadership team will ultimately have final say on
- Energize a team in a rut
Sadly, the initial interest and excitement generated during the meeting can flip to disappointment quickly after. The problem usually isn't in the meeting itself, it's the follow through. To avoid frustration and reduce the risk of long-term eye-rolling, there are two choices.
- Plan, schedule, and market the meeting as a team building exercise. Then when good strategic thinking happens and written down in the minutes, the team is delighted.
- Build follow through into the process at the beginning. Schedule a least post-meeting sessions to bring closure to the plan and, more importantly, get a few (2-3) of the priority actions rolling. Then, get a meeting on the calendar for one year out as a reminder to all that the plan will be revisited, progress reviewed, and actions refined for the next year.
3 tips for experiential board meetings
We look forward to board meetings like we do putting gas in the car. Getting together is obviously critical in order to run but you know you're going to bump into some questionable characters and afterwards have an intense desire to wash your hands.
Who would look forward to prepping for weeks in advance to entertain an bunch of well-meaning but ultimately bored and distracted know-it-alls? In the non-profit world, boards provide strategic guidance, raise funds, and make connections. In the for-profit world, it's pretty much the same-- except that a many are actually paid to be there. So that helps, I guess.
Either way, the issue we face when preparing for and engaging our boards is an issue of disconnected judgement. The organization's mission is clear. The board's purpose is clear. Unfortunately though, they're together so infrequently and rarely ever during a normal day that both sides lack sufficient understanding to really help each other help the organization.
What to do?
Commit to at least one experiential portion during the annual or semi-annual meeting. These sessions should be...
- At least 1/2 a day (4 hours) with a bit of time at the end to talk casually about what they did or saw
- Mimic normal day-to-day challenges to the greatest degree possible. Obviously, most staff or patients or tourists or clients will behave differently when there is someone unfamiliar lurking about. Even so, get the board involved with whatever you develop and deliver at the most fundamental level.
- Split board members up (so that they don't just talk to each other) and pair them with your most passionate staff. Focus on pairing board members with sparky, interesting people who embody the mission. With this approach, you might not pick your highest performers or even someone doing everything by the book. However, the benefit is that the board member will be exposed to an impassioned person who will naturally seize that opportunity to reinforce why the work is so important. They'll also see the strengths, weaknesses, and risks up close.
3 "must do's" for your next advisory council meeting
Before you click away to check out a more interesting topic-- such as the effectiveness of various types of dental floss-- just stick with me for a moment.
Do you have an external council or advisory committee whose raison d'etre is to review your program's progress, provide guidance, and make strategic recommendations? Uh, yeah. Me too.
In fact, just about every client I can think of has 1 (if not 14 active groups) hovering nearby who are "here to help!" And by "help" they mean ready to offer context-light suggestions and fancy footwork to avoid doing any actual work because they have other full-time jobs.
We do this advisory council thing to ourselves. It all sounds like a good idea in the beginning. "Hey, we're kicking of our new strategic plan so we should probably create an independent group to help steer the ship."
There is a lot right about the concept. Infusing an external perspective in any important new program is invaluable. If they're able to provide top cover too when things invariably go awry, then they're worth their weight in the coffee and light refreshments you have to provide to get them to show up in person at the meeting. The problems pop up about a month before the prescheduled quarterly meeting.
Usually, someone suddenly remembers that the council meeting is coming up and the program team immediately starts to get anxious. These external advisory councils are typically comprised of senior staff-- a gaggle of folks you clearly want to impress. However, they're also intentionally disconnected from day-to-day program operations. That's what gives them supposed objectivity. Council members are also selected to represent a variety of organizational interests. So in one meeting you and your program team has the delightful opportunity to piss off and disappoint not just one executive but a one from every division!
So, yes. Communicating with these folks can be tricky, distracting, time consuming, and even risky. To overcome these, you need to check yourself and your team against a list of "must do's" YOU need from the them and not just what they're expecting out of you. Counter to our typical approach, the best communications strategy is to consider the council a resource-- not a validate-or.
- Review the year's action plan. Too far out and they'll lose interest. Nobody cares and a few might be thinking they won't be around. Don't waste any time on super, outyear vision-y stuff. Instead, ask them to add and delete actions to ensure alignment with broader organizational goals. You might make a rule that this is a one for one swap. Anything new can be added as long as something else drops off the list. The objective isn't to overload but to hone the edges.
- Highlight hurdles-- which likely include money. Because they're advisory, you're not asking them for money but you're seeking advice on how to secure the resources you need. The tricky thing here is to be open to creative suggestions. Be prepared later to laugh over drinks with friends on the most ridiculous ones.
- Ask for advocacy. Seriously, this is big and should be relatively easy for them to do. The question is-- when do you have an upcoming meeting or speaking opportunity that you can share some of the highlights on what we're doing, our accomplishments, and plans for the future. Be bold in soliciting their support and get them to make a commitment out loud-- if you can.
On top of these, if you keep the presentations relatively short and end early, you're sure to please. Good luck!