Why meetings fail

We spend countless hours of our working time in meetings and workshops. To put it mildly, there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of the knowledge gained compared to the time spent. The unloved meeting itself is only the symptom. The real problem lies deeper.

Which meetings make sense - and which can go away?

A glance at the average Outlook calendar speaks volumes. And although no one is explicitly hired to spend their time in meetings, but rather to perform a defined task, studies show that meetings sometimes take up one-third of weekly work time.

The only way to reduce this abundance is to relentlessly question each session. "But we've been doing our Monday meeting forever!" Exactly. Does that automatically make it meaningful? More likely not. "What would happen if this meeting no longer existed?" This is a fair question. Especially with the countless regular meetings that have already clocked through the new calendar before the year has even begun. What is the concrete benefit of these ritualized meetings? And is a meeting really the best tool for the tasks on the table? This is often not the case. If, for example, the task is to pass on current information, this can be done more quickly and efficiently by mail. Specific questions can also be answered more easily if they are answered directly and personally in the neighboring office or on the phone.

In addition to the quantity of meetings, it is equally important to put the HOW - i.e. the way they are conducted - to the test. Because no matter how bad the reputation of shared togetherness is: meaningful collaboration offers the only opportunity to share knowledge, learn from each other and, through heterogeneous perspectives and expertise, to manage complexity and develop innovative solutions. Only - in which meetings does this actually happen? Which are the meetings from which the participants leave with the good feeling of having achieved something valuable and meaningful?

Success is not only decided in the meeting room

The uncomfortable news right from the start: The course for the success of the joint cooperation is not set in the meeting itself, but much earlier. Keyword preparation. And yes, preparation costs time. But unprepared meetings cost much more time and, moreover, a lot of money. Efficiency? No way!

In order for a meeting to have any chance at all of being considered successful at the end, it is crucial to deal with the specific goal of the meeting and the agenda required for this in advance. Sounds banal? Unfortunately it is not! How about a personal field study in the immediate environment? I am sure that in many cases it will unfortunately always come down to the same thing: Goal? Agenda? No!

A second aspect is crucial when it comes to the goal: Only with a defined goal in mind is it possible to determine who is needed to achieve this goal - and who is not. And it is precisely this group of people that needs to be invited. If relevant players are missing, there is usually no choice but to postpone the topic after some back and forth. But it is no better the other way around. If there are several people in the room who have nothing concrete to contribute, it is understandable that they will be preoccupied with other things in the meantime.

Create framework conditions for successful meetings

Often the separation is not crystal clear, because different topics are on the agenda. So what if there are items in a meeting that affect everyone as well as those that only some are involved in? In this case, it is advisable to deliberately marginalize the topics that only affect a part of the group.

If the relevant participants are then also informed about the goal and agenda in good time, they have the chance to prepare themselves accordingly. At the same time, this also eliminates a phenomenon that came to light in a recent study by collaboration provider Barco: According to this study, almost half of the 3,000 respondents regularly do not know what the meeting is about and what the goal of the meeting is. Among top executives, the figure is as high as 61%.

The framework conditions that need to be taken into account on the way to achieving the goal must also be clarified in advance. Regardless of whether it's strategic requirements from management, budget restrictions or existing obligations to partner companies - if the participants are to arrive at a feasible result in the end, this will only work if all framework conditions are transparent on the table.

Time and duration

Organizational preparation also includes determining the start and duration of meetings. And that is by no means trivial. Especially in the virtual world. In the virtual world, meetings usually start on the hour and end exactly after 60 minutes. At least in the calendar. It's hard to get out of meeting A at 9:00 a.m. and then get into meeting B at 9:00 a.m. on the dot. As a result, meetings start later and then - as payback, so to speak - last longer. Preparing the content and getting in the mood for the new topic? Not a chance!

If, on the other hand, the meeting duration of 60 minutes is shortened, this has two positive effects: The first is the buffer until the next full hour. This makes it possible to prepare for a subsequent appointment if necessary. And the additional benefit: A tighter time limit in the meeting can increase the focus and discipline of the participants.

Work on it instead of talking about it

Meetings often turn out to be a veritable round of chatter. Just like Karl Valentin: "Everything has already been said, but not by everyone. As soon as the participants are asked to write down their thoughts on a specific issue, for example on sticky notes in real or virtual space, things become concrete and useful. That's why it's crucial for constructive meetings to get participants actively involved.

Moderation and other roles

Facilitating a meeting is important to keep the structured, goal-oriented approach in focus and to guide the process. In addition, there are other roles that can support the joint cooperation. For example, for timekeeping and minutes. Ideally, the roles are changed from meeting to meeting. In order to improve as a team in meetings, it is advisable to schedule a short time window at the end of the meeting to reflect on the joint cooperation.

Tips for constructive cooperation

1. Consistently challenge meetings and topics: Regular meetings without added value are time and energy robbers. It is also best to remove topics from the agenda that can be handled better in an asynchronous manner.
2. No meeting without a goal and agenda: Defined goals enable focused work and good preparation.
3. Invite the right participants: Actionable results can be achieved with the relevant players at the table.
4. Shorter meetings are better meetings: Buffer times to the next appointment enable the preparation - the sportive time pressure in the meeting supports the focus.
5. Work on it instead of talking about it: By actively involving the participants, concrete results emerge.

Book Tip:

Michaela Stach: Moderation in Workshop and Meeting. Redesigning collaboration with results-oriented tools and methods. 1st edition BusinessVillage 2022. 254 pages. ISBN 978-3-86980-660-0

Author:
Michaela Stach is a passionate facilitator - also for large groups. With enthusiasm, empathy and appreciation she accompanies teams on the way to sustainable solutions and real commitment. Whether changes in companies, shaping the future in communities or interaction at congresses: With professionalism and liveliness, she brings groups into goal-oriented exchange. She leads the Academy for Systemic Moderation and conducts certificate trainings at two locations. www.akademie-fuer-systemische-moderation.de/