Comments on: Half the Meetings, Twice the Productivity

By: some serious meeting-itis « bradherndon.wordpress.com

some serious meeting-itis « bradherndon.wordpress.com — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:38:38 +0000

[...] for thanksgiving week. it was inspired in part by swerve’s recent posts: here, here, here and here. Patrick Lencioni is also worth a mention. good stuff. the trick for me is realizing that i can be [...]

By: Tom E. Snyder

Tom E. Snyder — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:10:36 +0000

Dustin,

http://www.lifechurch.tv/leadership-team

By: Dustin Pead

Dustin Pead — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 02:06:49 +0000

hey Craig! Thanks for making Catalyst One Day a part of your schedule. I realize the sacrifice you made to take time away from your family and come talk to us and i really appreciate that.

Also, thanks for taking time to sign my book. I was happy to meet you.

One questions for you: Where did you go to college? I went to Liberty University and i have heard that you attended there too, but wasn’t sure.

Anyway, thanks again!

By: evan blackerby

evan blackerby — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:20:43 +0000

these are great points. less is more. good old covey … “the good is the enemy of the best”…..

By: Kendra Golden

Kendra Golden — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:25:29 +0000

I have noticed and felt the effects of what Dave mentioned. A large part of our larger staff meetings really was worshiping together, being inspired and energized, casting new vision, and hearing exciting new developments from other teams. When the big meeting cut-down started to occur a few years ago (which unfortunately coincided with a lot of growth in the number of new staff) I really felt the loss of that.

For me, those large all-staff meetings were like a chance to come up to catch a breath of fresh air, especially in seasons where I was completely covered up being productive. That’s when I need a second wind the most.

I would suggest that leaders consider if they should use some of the time saved by cutting out bureaucratic meetings for better or more frequent motivational gatherings. We still haven’t landed on the best balance (IMHO).

By: Tom E. Snyder

Tom E. Snyder — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:27:00 +0000

Robb, in your situation if there is nothing to discuss you can have a fellowship get-to-gether.

By: Robb Gorringe

Robb Gorringe — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:48:27 +0000

My meetings are with volunteers, and though no one likes long-draw-out-meetings, my people LOVE the comradery that they feel. If we skip a month they start to complain. I think meetings need to have a rhythm and a sense of exciment so everyone leaves going, “yeah!”

By: Hope Brisbane Christian Church

Hope Brisbane Christian Church — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:53:28 +0000

This can be a great solution for bad meeting planning. I agree with Scott Williams, that the chair person or manager or pastor holding the meeting should really take responsibility for poorly planned meetings. Good leadership includes the ability to think clearly about the meeting… if no urgent matters are at hand (not that we should be held captive to the ‘tyranny of the urgent’) than the leader should really be thinking of where he/she is taking the team to the next level.

I agree that meeting for the sake of meetings can be a terrible waste of time for everybody involved… with that in mind we need to consider also the need to still keep a regularity of meeting up- even if the meetings need to be cancelled due to insignificant agenda items. The REAL indicator of how often a meeting needs to be can be the importance/urgency of the agenda. This way we are “purpose driven” (to steal Rick Warren’s term) rather than meeting driven.

Another key we have discovered is sometimes the attendance at meetings can become too large for functionality… by this I mean that too many leaders (all with good suggestions) can make the discussion of specific points irrelevant to the majority of the attendees. One method of solving this is to either choose attendees based on agenda items (leaders who are not ministering or interested in this area need not attend).

Alternatively, its important to re-asses regularily the purpose of meetings… in other words the exact same people may meet on the same regularity, but now for a completly different outcome… for example instead of your board meeting every week to cover “everything”, you may want to separate the meeting into fortnightly meetings of “strategic decisions in accordance with future developments and plans” and fortnightly meetings of “management/problem solving”. in this case the exact same people are meeting, in the same frequency, but for completly different purposes.

By: Brad Martin

Brad Martin — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:21:08 +0000

Great series of posts! We read “Death By Meeting” as a staff and it has totally taken our mtgs to a WNL! We’ve still got a long way to go, but we’re making progress. Another great book we went through is “5 Dysfunctions of a Team” by Lencioni and “it” by some other author? Thanks for all you do for the church.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:29:08 +0000

I TOTALLY understand this from a production perspective, I have scheduled some of our volunteers to meet quarterly or semi-monthly. What have you noticed about the relational strength or the trust levels? Do people spend more time casually relating since they are doing less in a formal meeting structure? What implications does this have for worship gatherings or small groups?

By: Danny

Danny — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:26:32 +0000

Do you still have weekly staff meetings, or have those been cut in half too? do you have different meetings for different levels of staff? etc..

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:40:27 +0000

I would love to cut the number of meetings in half. I always feel that things get communicated in one meeting only to have to be talked about in another meeting before anything can happen. Not to mention the things that happen in the meetings that I am not apart of, but still end of with projects from the meeting.

By: Scott Rodgers

Scott Rodgers — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:33:11 +0000

I totally agree. I have discovered that at least half the meetings we think we need can be accomplished by simply having some intentional conversations - not scheduled, no written agenda’s, no large groups gathered. They are more fun, more relational, more productive.

By: jenn Cady

jenn Cady — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:53:15 +0000

My response….YES, Way to GO! This takes so much PRESSURE off of “meetings” and WHAT TO DO at meetings. I had to give presentations every now and then in medical sales meetings and it was the worst PRESSURE! My boss wanted me to perform and I hated being evaluated for meeting content! YUCK!!!!! The sales reps were playing solitare on their lap tops…passing notes and were zoned out! What a drag!

You are making the BEST use of the time you have been given….Team Huddle…then “BREAK”…..Play Ball!

By: Scott Williams

Scott Williams — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:04:21 +0000

We have necessary meetings and that’s it period, exclamation point.!

I used to do consulting for government agencies and my recommendation would almost always be: quit meeting for the sake of meeting and stop having meetings to schedule another meeting, and put up your PowerPoint presentation because no one cares…

I did a post earlier this year entitled “Meeting Freak” that coincides with all the good stuff Craig is sharing. http://bigisthenewsmall.com/?p=290

By: Alan Reynolds

Alan Reynolds — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:04:59 +0000

I believe this works for you because of the effectiveness of your leadership team and your leadership. Having half the meetings with a team that is not effective still does not produce better results. At least in my experience.