4 ms·

I largely agree with Dave, but it's important to think about what you wish the alternative to be. If you ban laptops from meetings, what do you do when people p

I largely agree with Dave, but it's important to think about what you wish the alternative to be. If you ban laptops from meetings, what do you do when people pull their phones out? Are you going to ban phones from meetings too? What about daydreams, are you going to ban those too? I remember being in a military course where we were getting very little sleep, and naturally, there were no personal laptops and personal phones were banned. If people started to nod off from the lack of sleep, they were called out and asked to stand up to keep from falling asleep. Does anybody really want to work in that kind of environment where their attention is not invited, but commanded? Sure, it's important to make sure people are focused in meetings. But the way to do that isn't just by setting a positive example, but by increasing the focus of the meeting: reducing the number of invitees to only those who are really necessary, having a scheduling framework for who is expected to talk about what and for how long, and making sure that everybody in the meeting is focused on producing, together, the documentation (e.g. a record of the decision made) which is the product of that meeting. People are a lot less likely to "slack off" in meetings if they feel like their presence is necessary, appreciated, and productive.

Waterluvian 9y ago
I really enjoyed reading your response. I think your point can be seen everywhere: commanding desired behaviour never works well, facilitating and encouraging it does.
bpp 9y ago
100% agree with this. I'm working with a new team and our (remote) PM loves scheduling long meetings (60 minutes when we sometimes finish in 20). I'm trying to help him see that we don't need to block out 30 or 60 minutes for a meeting just because those are easiest on Google Calendar.
- digaozao 9y ago
  Probably a cultural thing. I don't see a problem with this. Depending on the meeting, there is no way it will end in 15 or 45 minutes. If it finishes earlier, great! everybody goes back to work. Sometimes it goes longer, and people have to check if it's being productive, or if they need to gather more info to come back later to subject. 30 minutes seems ok for a meeting. Lower than that, maybe you don't even need a meeting. Just some chat in a slack group.
  - watwut 9y ago
    25 minutes long meeting over slack group can take three hours. You making that meeting so that the issue is solved within 10/20/30 minutes instead of over whole afternoon as people type and take their time to answer.
ckastner 9y ago
> Are you going to ban phones from meetings too? My employer does this, and it's wonderful. > Does anybody really want to work in that kind of environment where their attention is not invited, but commanded? No, but nobody is making that argument.
- alexion82 9y ago
  Bad habits go away slow and tend to come back fast.
taeric 9y ago
Slippery slope arguments usually impeed progress as much as they help warn of dangers. That is, these are good questions, but are they intended as road blocks? Each one can be easily answered and you can always change your answer.
shaklee3 9y ago
I searched Google for this elusive daydream device before realizing what you were talking about.
ksk 9y ago
Whats wrong with any of that? Banning sounds childish but the best fix for someone who is not interested in their work is to fire them, not coddle them. Keeping them around is a net drain on the company. Of course if you're biased towards the employer always being in the wrong, then you might feel differently. At some point, you can't tell someone they're doing it wrong if what they're doing works for them and they're producing results. I don't feel inspired by my manager/team so I'm going to doze off at my desk, and My employees are over-paid lazy sacks of s* are two sides of the same coin.
- hrktb 9y ago
  I wonder what kind of organisation other people are working in. We do 30~60 minute meetings that are reasonably done well, people are impacted by what is discussed. But honestly it’s nothing so difficult or riveting that needs everyone to focus like crazy for an hour straight. Then people talk slowly, have to explain details that half of the room knows but not the other one. People ask questions that you might not care about but the rest of the people do, and you won’t stand up and go away just for a 5 min question. Then focusing 100% of our intention doesn’t shorten the meeting. We tried, and it wasn’t more efficient in any significant way (who cares for 10min gained for 50 min of full focus?). Instead people would just skip meetings altogether, because the balance between the info to share and one hour of their time was almost always in favor of their time, and dreaded to no end mandatory meetings. ROTI scores were horrible while never improving. We just had to stop.
Fishkins 9y ago
I do think it's a good idea to ban phones & laptops when possible (sometimes they're need for presenting, note-taking, etc). Daydreams really aren't comparable to the other things we're talking about. I agree it's important for meetings to be concise and focused on issues that are relevant to the attendees. However, I don't think the presenter should have to be flashy. If someone has their phone/laptop out, they might not even give the presenter the initial few minutes of attention it takes to get engaged with the topic. Also, I'm in favor of banning devices at meetings because IME it leads to improvements in the meeting structure. If there's a long, boring meeting I might be relatively OK with it if I can spend the time doing something else on my laptop. If the only option is to pay attention to the useless meeting, however, then I'm more likely to provide suggestions and pressure to make the meeting better.
ElijahLynn 9y ago
If people in meetings need dopamine hits every 30 seconds to avoid falling asleep then they probably have a lower performing brain because of chronic sleep deprivation. Most people are sleep deprived, and if they can't focus for a 30 second meeting then they should head to the nap room.
- hinkley 9y ago
  Or maybe your meetings aren’t as amazing as you think they are. Banning phones and laptops means that everyone in the meeting is either invested in it or motivated not to get invited to the next one.

Waterluvian 9y ago

I really enjoyed reading your response. I think your point can be seen everywhere: commanding desired behaviour never works well, facilitating and encouraging it does.

bpp 9y ago

100% agree with this. I'm working with a new team and our (remote) PM loves scheduling long meetings (60 minutes when we sometimes finish in 20). I'm trying to help him see that we don't need to block out 30 or 60 minutes for a meeting just because those are easiest on Google Calendar.

digaozao 9y ago
Probably a cultural thing. I don't see a problem with this. Depending on the meeting, there is no way it will end in 15 or 45 minutes. If it finishes earlier, great! everybody goes back to work. Sometimes it goes longer, and people have to check if it's being productive, or if they need to gather more info to come back later to subject. 30 minutes seems ok for a meeting. Lower than that, maybe you don't even need a meeting. Just some chat in a slack group.
- watwut 9y ago
  25 minutes long meeting over slack group can take three hours. You making that meeting so that the issue is solved within 10/20/30 minutes instead of over whole afternoon as people type and take their time to answer.

ckastner 9y ago

> Are you going to ban phones from meetings too? My employer does this, and it's wonderful. > Does anybody really want to work in that kind of environment where their attention is not invited, but commanded? No, but nobody is making that argument.

alexion82 9y ago
Bad habits go away slow and tend to come back fast.

taeric 9y ago

Slippery slope arguments usually impeed progress as much as they help warn of dangers. That is, these are good questions, but are they intended as road blocks? Each one can be easily answered and you can always change your answer.

shaklee3 9y ago

I searched Google for this elusive daydream device before realizing what you were talking about.

ksk 9y ago

Whats wrong with any of that? Banning sounds childish but the best fix for someone who is not interested in their work is to fire them, not coddle them. Keeping them around is a net drain on the company. Of course if you're biased towards the employer always being in the wrong, then you might feel differently. At some point, you can't tell someone they're doing it wrong if what they're doing works for them and they're producing results. I don't feel inspired by my manager/team so I'm going to doze off at my desk, and My employees are over-paid lazy sacks of s* are two sides of the same coin.

hrktb 9y ago
I wonder what kind of organisation other people are working in. We do 30~60 minute meetings that are reasonably done well, people are impacted by what is discussed. But honestly it’s nothing so difficult or riveting that needs everyone to focus like crazy for an hour straight. Then people talk slowly, have to explain details that half of the room knows but not the other one. People ask questions that you might not care about but the rest of the people do, and you won’t stand up and go away just for a 5 min question. Then focusing 100% of our intention doesn’t shorten the meeting. We tried, and it wasn’t more efficient in any significant way (who cares for 10min gained for 50 min of full focus?). Instead people would just skip meetings altogether, because the balance between the info to share and one hour of their time was almost always in favor of their time, and dreaded to no end mandatory meetings. ROTI scores were horrible while never improving. We just had to stop.

Fishkins 9y ago

I do think it's a good idea to ban phones & laptops when possible (sometimes they're need for presenting, note-taking, etc). Daydreams really aren't comparable to the other things we're talking about. I agree it's important for meetings to be concise and focused on issues that are relevant to the attendees. However, I don't think the presenter should have to be flashy. If someone has their phone/laptop out, they might not even give the presenter the initial few minutes of attention it takes to get engaged with the topic. Also, I'm in favor of banning devices at meetings because IME it leads to improvements in the meeting structure. If there's a long, boring meeting I might be relatively OK with it if I can spend the time doing something else on my laptop. If the only option is to pay attention to the useless meeting, however, then I'm more likely to provide suggestions and pressure to make the meeting better.

ElijahLynn 9y ago

If people in meetings need dopamine hits every 30 seconds to avoid falling asleep then they probably have a lower performing brain because of chronic sleep deprivation. Most people are sleep deprived, and if they can't focus for a 30 second meeting then they should head to the nap room.

hinkley 9y ago
Or maybe your meetings aren’t as amazing as you think they are. Banning phones and laptops means that everyone in the meeting is either invested in it or motivated not to get invited to the next one.