4 ms·

Perhaps the problem for execs is their focus on meetings. I would bet that at least 25% of meetings don’t have to be live, multi person events. Async communic

Perhaps the problem for execs is their focus on meetings. I would bet that at least 25% of meetings don’t have to be live, multi person events. Async communication can be more effective when it causes people to think a bit before talking.

ebiester 3y ago
There are a few tradeoffs. For executives, they are trying to gather more information. What are the power dynamics? Who is deferring to whom? Where is the unstated conflict that isn't on the page? Is there obvious dysfunction? Do people actually understand the problem to be solved in the same way as the executive, and how do these need to align? (Is the conflict between the sales team director and the vp of engineering a personal conflict exposed as a business one? Is the sales org selling more than what the engineering team has delivered? Is the problem really that the wrong things are being worked on? All of this may be contextualized within something as simple as a status meeting.) They are also usually brought in for conflict resolution. Conflict resolution has the same dynamics that show up off of the page. Sometimes, it takes a few sharp questions to cut through the stated conflict to find the real one or to align people on the greater business objective. Finally, it is quicker to read than a meeting, but it is much longer to write. If you are being asked to talk with sixteen different groups in a day, you cannot write all of that.
kyleee 3y ago
I think your second point is largely correct, but one of the big problems it exposes is that a big chunk of execs and even employees don’t / don’t want to think much before talking. I’ve experienced many people who appear to make careers off of shooting from the hip, who will never respond to text based communication that is longer than one, maybe two sentences or maybe even not at all.

ebiester 3y ago

There are a few tradeoffs. For executives, they are trying to gather more information. What are the power dynamics? Who is deferring to whom? Where is the unstated conflict that isn't on the page? Is there obvious dysfunction? Do people actually understand the problem to be solved in the same way as the executive, and how do these need to align? (Is the conflict between the sales team director and the vp of engineering a personal conflict exposed as a business one? Is the sales org selling more than what the engineering team has delivered? Is the problem really that the wrong things are being worked on? All of this may be contextualized within something as simple as a status meeting.) They are also usually brought in for conflict resolution. Conflict resolution has the same dynamics that show up off of the page. Sometimes, it takes a few sharp questions to cut through the stated conflict to find the real one or to align people on the greater business objective. Finally, it is quicker to read than a meeting, but it is much longer to write. If you are being asked to talk with sixteen different groups in a day, you cannot write all of that.

kyleee 3y ago

I think your second point is largely correct, but one of the big problems it exposes is that a big chunk of execs and even employees don’t / don’t want to think much before talking. I’ve experienced many people who appear to make careers off of shooting from the hip, who will never respond to text based communication that is longer than one, maybe two sentences or maybe even not at all.