This post is part of a series.  Click here to read the whole thing.

I’ll admit it.  I love meetings.  I love the socializing, I love the energy of people working together toward a common goal.  I love the excitement generated when a group of people come up with an idea no one would have considered on their own.

I realize, however, these meeting joys aren’t a sure thing.  Some meetings go on and on forever, wasting everyone’s time and generating nothing but mental lists of ways to end your suffering with office supplies.

There is a way to have more meeting joy and less meeting sorrow.  All you have to do is learn when to back away from the flipchart.

When Not to Meet

Meetings have a bad reputation because they are often used inappropriately. If you attend meetings under the following circumstances, all the great planning in the world won’t take away that “stab your eyes out feeling.”

When you (only) want to deliver information

Meeting so you (or anyone) can “hold court” to pontificate about your latest ideas is an ego trip–and thus a terrible use of time.  If your meetings basically involve one person (or worse–a series of people!) talking, and everyone else listening (or pretending to listen) you need to stop having meetings and start disseminating information in more appropriate ways.

Ideally, the alternative will be a written report.  Reports make the information available in an easy to access format that doesn’t depend on the memory or mood of the listener.  It’s also more concrete, so the presenter is likely to be much clearer than he might have been if he were giving the report off the cuff.  It does take a bit more time to prepare–but if you consider the total amount of time used by the speakers and the listeners–it’s a big savings.

If a written report just isn’t going to happen, consider video reports or audio reports.  These reports can then be transcribed–providing most of the benefits of the written report in much less time.

When being in the same room adds nothing to the process

It is common for a team working on a  project to assume regular meetings are required to “keep everyone on the same page”.  Thanks to the internet, many of these meetings are no longer necessary.  Hold one meeting at the beginning of the process to develop parameters, make sure the group has a shared understanding of the task ahead, and then do the rest of the collaboration using an online tool like Wiki Spaces, Google Docs or Google Wave.*

These tools allow for asynchronous communication and create instant documentation of the work that is done.  This means instead of holding a meeting and then going off to do the work– team members do the work as their schedules allow.  By using the collaboration tool, the team still gets the value of group input but they don’t have to do the work at the same time, and they don’t have to send the document back and forth as an attachment.  This means no more updating the wrong copy of the document.  The online tools also offer version control so it’s easy to see who made what changes when, and to revert to old copies if necessary.

When you are finished, use the meeting time you saved to go out  and to celebrate.

When the right people can’t attend

Meetings work when the right people come together to discuss the right things.  Having a meetings with only some of the players, or with people “representing” someone who can’t attend don’t work.  If the key players can’t or won’t attend, all the meetings in the world won’t help you make progress.

When people aren’t prepared

If the agenda didn’t get out on time, or if participants haven’t come to a meeting prepared to work (for whatever reason) it’s really best to cancel.  Your preparation time may feel wasted ,but by holding the meeting will waste more time, and  you will train participants that preparation isn’t required.

When you don’t have something specific to discuss

Holding a meeting just because you’ve got it set up as a re-occurring appointment on your calendar is not a good reason to get everyone together.  If there are difficult, complicated or controversial topics to discuss–by all means, have a meeting.  If not, skip it (or get together for drinks instead).

Your Turn

What types of meetings do you wish to cancel forever?  Under which circumstances do you enjoy a good meeting?

If this post was helpful, please sign up for e-mail updates at the top of the page, or add this blog to your RSS feed .

* If you need a Google Wave invite, I’ve got extra.

This post is part of a series.  Click here to read the whole thing.

If the thought of adding “rules” to your meetings makes you feel rebellious on general principle, you aren’t alone–especially if you define “rule” as a restriction used by the powerful to maintain control.

There is, however, another kind of rule.

Games have rules that that have nothing to do with power dynamics.  Game rules are about creating the environment in which the game is played.  Without rules, games would not be fun.  They might not even exist.  Rules define the objectives of games, they create an even playing field, and keep players on the same page.  Without rules, it would be almost impossible for new people to join a game–because there would be no way to teach them how to play.

Ground rules are like that.  They provide a way for a group to decide together how they want to work, how they want to be treated and what is expected (of participants and the facilitator).  They ensure everyone is on the same page, and focused on the same objective.  They are about making sure there is a way (for everyone) to win.

Like games, different meetings with different people require different rules.  Eventually you may create new ground rules of your own or adapt rules you see other places–but to begin it is useful to have a “starter set.”  The rules shared here are  used by Dayton Diode and are adapted from the set used by Laird Schwab in his work with co-housing communities.

If you’ve never used ground rules, these will get you started, but they are not the only set out there.  Roger Schwartz outlines 9 as part of his Skilled Facilitator work.  If your group is fairly advanced or you are dealing with highly contentious issues, I recommend his set over the ones outlined here.  Also, check the comments for ideas for other useful rules from your fellow readers.

Ground rules to get you started

Take care of yourself
Meeting participants have the right (and responsibility) to do what they need to be comfortable in the meeting.  If they need to step out for a moment,  they should feel free to do so; if they can’t hear the conversation, they should let the facilitator know.  This rule doesn’t give anyone the right to be rude; it simply states individual needs are important and participants have a responsibility to make their needs known.  This rule also means participants are only responsible  for themselves.  Everyone can and should express their own opinions– there is no need for anyone to speak for another.   As one of my meeting participants once put it, “Please don’t express opinions you don’t have”.

We are all on the same team
It is common (and beneficial) for meeting participants to approach issues from different perspectives, and to have (very) different ideas on how goals should be accomplished.  Getting all of those different ideas on the table is the reason to have meetings.  All that diversity can also lead to disagreements and since most of us have some baggage around conflict  this is the place where meetings can get uncomfortable.

This rule is not about avoiding the conflict (Oh, look we disagree–but we are on the same team so let’s just ignore it).  This rule is an invitation to  re-frame.  Traditionally, we assume conflict means one party wins and the other loses.  With this rule in place, conflict means working together to find a solution big enough to encompass both party’s requirements.

I’m not suggesting this is an easy task.  for more support in this endeavor read Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and William Ury.

If confused, ask
Many meeting problems aren’t caused by substantive conflicts, they are caused by misunderstandings.  The purpose of this rule is to remind participants to check out their assumptions early and often.  By following this rule groups ensure their energy is spent working in the areas where real conflict exists.  This rule is really a subset of “take care of yourself” but avoiding misunderstandings is important enough to state twice.

When in doubt (about process), the facilitator decides
The purpose of this rule is to focus as much group time as possible on the actual work.  It’s important for group members to decide together on the outcome of the items being discussed, but it’s (way) less useful to spend time deciding how to decide.  If the group is in agreement on how to proceed on a process issue it’s generally a good idea for the facilitator to move in that direction.   When there is confusion or disagreement,  it’s generally best for someone to pick a direction quickly.  That person should be the facilitator.

Love ground rules? Share your favorites and why you love them in the comments.

If you enjoyed this post, sign up for e-mail updates at the top of the page, or add this blog to your RSS feed .