House of Eratosthenes

This list is a sad thing for me, a former Project Manager, to review. It’s not because I failed to do these things; it’s because, on the rare occasions on which it was really up to me to run a meeting, I did do them and they probably weren’t helpful to my career. In fact, the only thing on the list I didn’t do, which is to bring munchies, if I did that I would likely have gotten into trouble. I can just hear management asking “did you, or are you going to, expense that?” with no correct answer to the question possible.

Other people who were so-called Project Managers were clearly more in keeping with what my organization wanted, and enjoying a boost to their careers…although many of them hit the unemployment line as quickly as I did. They did not do anything on this list. In fact, they did the opposite. And this “helped” them…I guess. They got their positive strokes, their approval.

I suppose when the mediocre performers are employed just as long as the people who are really trying, and the merit increases barely keep pace with inflation, there’s no “right” or “wrong” way to do anything. Process over outcome, folks. World’s becoming more vaginized. Still & all, if I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t do it any differently. If you want to stand up for what’s right, make the best possible use of your time and everybody else’s time, and really give it your all to make sure the project is a success, act-like-you-own-the-company and all that — this is pretty good:

Establish whether the meeting is absolutely necessary. Before you even think about scheduling a meeting, figure out if you really and truly need one. You should only call for a meeting if:

* The information to be discussed could not be disseminated via telephone or email. Meetings should never be called when only a one-way information exchange is needed.
* There are clear benefits to having everyone together in one room.
:
Type up an agenda for the meeting with a specific list of what items will be discussed and in what order. Email everyone a copy a day or two before the meeting to give them a heads up about what to expect and some time to start thinking about the issues and what they’d like to contribute. People can also make additions and objections to the agenda before the meeting instead of at the meeting. Make it clear in your message that if it’s not on the agenda, it can’t be discussed at the meeting. Paste the agenda into the body of the email. People don’t open attachments. [emphasis in original]

And I really, really like this thing down near the bottom. A whole lot.

There are 3 different ways to set up a meeting room: the U-shape, a circle, or lecture style…The circular, uber-democratic, let’s hug it out style has been in vogue for awhile now, and it makes everyone feel important, but it’s also the reason meetings get off-track and become totally unproductive. The truth is that not everyone does have something important to say, and a leader is crucial in keeping things focused on the things that matter.

You know what is a great example of what he’s talking about here. Thunderball, the scene where Number One calls out those two guys who didn’t make as much profit as they were supposed to, and fries the one that was skimming off the top. Not “fires.” “Fries.”

I really detest the round table marathon. I think everyone with a working brain hates it. Anyone who’s been there for any length of time, can make the connection: That’s next year’s raise that’s paying for this circle-jerk. Oh goodie, ol’ Windbag McWindbaggerson to my left, wants to point something out that nobody’s thought of before…oh, you’re so important Windbag, go for it Windbag, don’t leave any detail unexplored.

The problem isn’t that the Project Managers don’t know any better. The problem is one of incentive. There really isn’t any such thing as a good Project Manager or a bad one. So the problem, I think, really exists in the layer above; the PM role is viewed as one of purest bureaucracy. It isn’t acknowledged that this PM over here really excels at making the most of staff time, and this other PM over there really sucks at it. Instead, the PM’s stewardship over a particular project is seen like a gallon of vegetable oil — a can is a can is a can, no difference amongst any of them.

It’s really more like a waiter. This guy can effectively work three tables, that guy can work five, it’s simply not do-able to take on more than seven, so don’t try. If I had my way, they’d earn their wages like waiters; they’d exist on tips. These are crucial people. If they can’t multi-task and manage details and make the best use of an hour, then nobody else can either.

1. Set a time limit, and assign definitive limits to the time devoted to each agenda item.

2. Stick to it. Any meeting that goes over an hour is definably out of control. Most are better confined to 45 minutes. One thing that rarely surfaces in the quicker/better/cheaper triage is the time wasted in meeting rooms.

The definition of what constitutes a productive meeting is in fact the result of a process – nobody ever gets it right the first time. If you find that you can’t accomplish what you set out in the agenda, you need to re-assess your agenda-setting criteria. Next time, address a more refined set of goals. Things will tighten up over time, and not much time, either. As it becomes apparent to team members that meetings are worth their time, more enthusiastic and meaningful participation will increase.

3. Delegating tasks, and assigning deliverables for the next meeting is crucial. These define the agenda of the meeting to follow. Often what is discovered is that the time expectation of a deliverable is unreasonable, and the only way to assess this is to try it. The most productive meeting series are those in which everybody, PMs too, learns something every time.

What I teach team members as well as leaders is that the function of a Project Manager is to Expose The Truth. Team members are taught that it’s not your team leader’s job to write code, or produce solicitation letters or whatever, however capable he may be. It’s a team member’s job to demonstrate the realities involved, thereby giving the team leader what she needs to do her job.

It’s a team, it’s not a democracy. The PM has plenty to do without adding the necessity of micromanagement. And in any case, it’s a thankless task, as I’m sure you are well aware.
- rob | 12/30/2009 @ 18:00
I was brought into a government project that was running into troubles. Their project meetings were taking 4 to 6 hours or more to complete. I painfully sat through a couple of these disasters before I took up my role.

When I was done, no meeting lasted more than 45 minutes. If anyone strayed from the agenda into irrelevancies, I brutally slapped them down and moved on. It didn’t take too long before people got with the program
- pdwalker | 12/31/2009 @ 09:00
[…] a meeting is yet another good litmus test. Some meeting chairs do it right: Agenda item, question, answer, does anyone have any objections, next agenda item — boom, […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 02/15/2010 @ 12:47
[…] and Medicators essay: Running a meeting is yet another good litmus test. Some meeting chairs do it right: Agenda item, question, answer, does anyone have any objections, next agenda item — boom, boom, […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 02/27/2010 @ 08:33

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

How to Run a MeetingWednesday, December 30th, 2009

How to Run a Meeting
Wednesday, December 30th, 2009