OraFusion.com - No Surprises: managing meetings

Project Management Articles

No Surprises: Managing Meetings

Introduction

Meetings are an essential facet of managing projects. There are two kinds of meetings in the context of projects - routine and, well, not so routine. The former are your run of the mill, recurring, meetings such as status updates. These usually follow a standard format and are quite predictable in terms of outcomes. In contrast, the latter are one-off confabulations - usually called when some important, possibly unanticipated, decisions need to be made (request for additional resources, say). There's generally a lot at stake on the outcome of these one-off meetings as is illustrated by the following example. At a status meeting, Dennis declares that he's unable to meet the delivery deadline for the database module. Pete the project manager then schedules a meeting to discuss the consequences of Dennis' delinquency, and how those consequences might be managed. It is clear that there's much riding on the outcome of the second meeting. It may even lead to another one-off meeting - this time with Simpson the sponsor, to request additional funding. In the remainder of this article, the term "meeting" refers to such, not-so-routine, meetings.

When organised and managed properly, meetings can facilitate decision making and help achieve consensus on important matters. The sad fact is that many meetings end in frustration and frayed tempers, especially when important (often contentious) matters are discussed. In many cases, the meeting organiser thinks (s)he knows all invitee viewpoints, and hence believes that a decision will be made without much ado. However, the meeting plays to a different script, and concludes (after much tendentious bickering!) with no decision, or worse - a bad decision. The organiser is left wondering what went wrong. Here's what - (s)he failed to manage the meeting. Most often we set an agenda, organise the meeting and then leave the rest to fate (or whatever deities we may pray to). This should not be so. With some planning, it is possible to influence the outcome of a meeting, or at least have advance warning of an unfavourable outcome. This article presents some tips on managing meetings so that there are no surprises. Following these could keep you from being mauled by management, pressured by peers or even trumped by team members in project (or, for that matter, any) meetings.

Before the meeting

There's much that can be done to reduce the surprise factor, even before the meeting takes place. In fact I'd argue that most of the work can and should be done at this stage. By the time the meeting begins, it is too late to influence your stakeholders - they've got their opinion and they're going to stick with it. This is why it's critical to do your groundwork. This involves the following:

Set a clear agenda - An agenda is not merely a list of points to be discussed. A clear agenda should also include a brief description of meeting objectives and decisions to be made. If need be, these should be accompanied by an explanation of why these are important. The agenda is also a good place to announce the meeting chair and secretary - i.e. the person responsible for conducting the meeting and the one who'll be recording minutes. In the article I assume you have the honour (or pain!) of the former, and have delegated the latter to someone else. Generally the same person shouldn't do both.
Invite all stakeholders - Be sure to invite every relevant stakeholder to the conference. Double check your invitee list. Remember, hell hath no fury like a stakeholder sidelined. Invite important stakeholders even if you know they won't be able to make it. Inclusion is the point here - everyone should feel that they've been given an opportunity to have their say. Which brings me to my next point.
Canvass stakeholders (directly or indirectly) - Yes, you need to know everyone's position on the issue before the meeting. Walk around, talk to people, get to know what they think. This is best done one-on-one in an informal way, so that you get their honest view, unconstrained by the presence and opinions of others. Further, this should be done face-to-face, so that you can gauge their non-verbal reactions to what you say.
If some stakeholders have contrary opinions, then try the following:
- Understand the motives that underlie contrary opinions. Why are they taking a contrary stand? What do they expect to gain from it etc.?
- Sound the contrarians out on other viewpoints. With some convincing (or compromising), it may be possible to bring them around to other options.
What if you can't meet a stakeholder? Well, in that case you should try to suss out their stance indirectly, by speaking to their colleagues or reports. Obviously this will need some tact on your part; no one wants to be seen as telling tales about others.

Through groundwork, you have set the stage for the meeting. You now have a fair understanding of where people stand on the issues, and what it might take to convince those with contrary opinions.

During the Meeting

At the meeting, it is a matter of getting all stakeholders to work towards the meeting objectives. These should be clear from the agenda, but you may want to confirm that everyone understands and agrees with them. Then, once the meeting is in progress, you need to ensure that everyone gets a fair hearing while staying focussed on the main issues. Here are a few tips that will help with this:

Solicit input from all - Make sure everyone gets to state their positions and/or their objections to others' positions. What generally happens in meetings is that the loudest voice (also known as the "squeaky wheel") gets the most attention. You may need to intervene in order to give the quieter stakeholders a chance to have their say. Others may just be hesitant to speak. Observe everyone around the table, and offer them an opportunity to speak if their expressions indicate that they might want to do so.
Empathise - You may not agree with everyone, but you do need to understand reasons for contrary positions. One way to do this is to imagine yourself to be a contrarian and ask yourself the following questions: Why am I taking this position? What do I stand to gain if this happens? What do I lose if that happens? etc. Your groundwork prior to the meeting will help here. Through it you already have an appreciation of their motives.
Terminate tangents - Stick to the agenda. In all too many meetings the main issue is forgotten, and attendees end up arguing over some minor point. You, as the meeting chairperson, need to step in and terminate these tangents before they shoot off in random directions, taking your meeting with them.
Steer the proceedings - As the meeting chair, you must steer the proceedings towards achieving the aims stated in the agenda. I've already alluded to this in the point above. However, sometimes it is more than terminating tangents - you may need to remind attendees about the agenda items and meeting aims from time to time or (if that's too overt) subtly nudge the proceedings in the desired direction.
Take notes - You've already nominated someone to record the minutes. This does not absolve you from taking notes! Be sure to take notes that reflect your understanding of what transpires - i.e the meaning of what's said. When doing this, you may need to seek clarification from people regarding what they mean. This brings me to my next point
Seek clarification - If something's not clear, ask the speaker what they mean. Do this at the time - don't wait until the meeting's over. People don't always say what they mean (and vice-versa!). Further meeting minutes do not record meaning. A good way to seek clarification is to summarise what's said in your own words and ask the speaker if it is a correct interpretation of their position.
State outcomes and next steps - End the meeting by stating meeting outcomes and next steps. The former are decisions made and the latter are generally action points for individual attendees. Ask all attendees if they agree with the stated outcomes and actions. If not, be sure to reach a common understanding before adjourning the meeting.

At the end of the meeting you may well find that you have no decision. There could be many reasons for this: running out of time or no consensus, for example. Even if this is so, it is likely that progress has been made on a difficult matter. Further all attendees have a common understanding of what needs to be done next.

(Soon) After the Meeting

Although the meeting's over, you aren't done yet. Following-up will help ensure that agreed tasks are carried out and decisions implemented. Some follow-up actions to consider are:

Circulate minutes and notes - It is important that this is done soon after the meeting else you lose impact and credibility. Delaying this signals that you do not believe the meeting was important. True story: I'm still waiting on minutes from a meeting that occurred over a month ago. The meeting was (allegedly!) super important to the people who organised it. However, through their inaction, I now feel like my time's been wasted.
Time for another walk around - After giving people enough time to digest the minutes it's time for another walk around. Check back with stakeholders. Are they happy with the outcome and/or action points? Do they see any potential new problems on the horizon?

Obviously, some meeting decisions could have long-term consequences. These obviously need to be managed as well. Fortunately (for me) managing these are not in scope for an article on managing meetings.

In Adjournment

Meetings are an important mode of communication in projects. However, like many activities that involve people, meetings need to be managed properly in order to achieve optimal outcomes. I've used the above techniques in managing important meetings. I hope you'll find them as useful as I have.

Back to the top