3 ms·
> No, setting an agenda is a way to give people a chance to prepare for a meeting and to keep the meeting on track. A meeting with an agenda sent out ahead of t
by g051051 4y ago
> No, setting an agenda is a way to give people a chance to prepare for a meeting and to keep the meeting on track. A meeting with an agenda sent out ahead of time is far more efficient than a meeting where people just show up and think of things to chat about.
I go so far as to reject meetings that don't have an agenda specified. Either that, or (if I'm feeling generous) reply to the meeting invite with a "Maybe" and ask specifically for an agenda.
- ethbr0 4y ago^ This. If a meeting doesn't have an agenda, then it has no terminating condition, and is therefore an infinite loop until it times out. Don't go to those meetings. And more constructively, don't create those meetings. An agenda takes ~3 minutes to add; there's no excuse for not having one. E.g. Agenda for this comment: (1) express agreement, (2) clarify what's toxic about agenda-less meetings using computer science analogy, (3) appeal to reader to improve their own behavior, (4) preemptively rebut complaints about suggested behavior. Done.
- monkeydust 4y agoI wish this was enforced in meeting systems across corporations unless all participants elect not to have one (appreciate certain sensitive or perhaps social meetings might not need this)