4 ms·

Why not dedicate half of the meeting to giving people time to read documents or watch demo videos? Then submit questions that can be addressed while the content

Why not dedicate half of the meeting to giving people time to read documents or watch demo videos? Then submit questions that can be addressed while the content is fresh in everyone’s mind.

karaterobot 3y ago
You end up doing that, out of necessity. But it's worse in every way: people have to read and formulate questions under time pressure, rather than when it's comfortable for them. Anyone who did read (or helped write) the documents in question is sitting around wasting their time. And of course it doesn't make the meeting any shorter.
- thierrydamiba 3y ago
  Sounds like you are stuck between a rock and a hard place my friend. Hope things get better for you but it sounds like there is no meeting format that would work for your team. Maybe just cut out meetings entirely and see how that goes.
- jedberg 3y ago
  At Amazon we had a policy that each meeting starts with a memo and reading period. Every issue you brought up is true, but also pretty easy to get past. > people have to read and formulate questions under time pressure People who aren't good at that still have the option to read ahead of time. They need to know themselves to figure out which kind of person they are. They also have the option to submit feedback after the fact. > Anyone who did read (or helped write) the documents in question is sitting around wasting their time. Usually if you were an author or already read it, you either did your emails, wrote your next document, or just showed up after reading period. Sometimes you'd use that as your lunchtime if you WFH while you waited for people to read your doc. Or you would read the comments as they were being left on your document in real time so you could respond or do more research. But I always managed to fill the time with something else productive. You adapt pretty quickly. > And of course it doesn't make the meeting any shorter. This is 100% true. It makes them longer and slows down decision making. But it also tends to mean that decisions can be made (and are recorded right in the doc!) in one meeting instead of multiple meetings, since the main thoughts are already written down. To be clear, I'm not saying it's a good idea. I found most of the meetings run that way to be a waste, because they indexed on "every meeting starts with a document" even when it wasn't necessary. But it might be helpful to try it for one or two meetings where you are wasting a lot of time talking about things that could have been written down.
ashfernandez 3y ago
Works for some companies (i.e. Amazon), but many hate doing this. I'm making it such that if someone preps a meeting they HAVE to assign a responsible person for each and every talking point. When they do this, that person gets a notice saying they have something to prepare ahead of time for. SO even if they don't have enough time to look at the whole agenda, they can easily identify what exactly they need to pinpoint-prep for.

Why not dedicate half of the meeting to giving people time to read documents or watch demo videos? Then submit questions that can be addressed while the content is fresh in everyone’s mind.

karaterobot 3y ago

You end up doing that, out of necessity. But it's worse in every way: people have to read and formulate questions under time pressure, rather than when it's comfortable for them. Anyone who did read (or helped write) the documents in question is sitting around wasting their time. And of course it doesn't make the meeting any shorter.

thierrydamiba 3y ago
Sounds like you are stuck between a rock and a hard place my friend. Hope things get better for you but it sounds like there is no meeting format that would work for your team. Maybe just cut out meetings entirely and see how that goes.
jedberg 3y ago
At Amazon we had a policy that each meeting starts with a memo and reading period. Every issue you brought up is true, but also pretty easy to get past. > people have to read and formulate questions under time pressure People who aren't good at that still have the option to read ahead of time. They need to know themselves to figure out which kind of person they are. They also have the option to submit feedback after the fact. > Anyone who did read (or helped write) the documents in question is sitting around wasting their time. Usually if you were an author or already read it, you either did your emails, wrote your next document, or just showed up after reading period. Sometimes you'd use that as your lunchtime if you WFH while you waited for people to read your doc. Or you would read the comments as they were being left on your document in real time so you could respond or do more research. But I always managed to fill the time with something else productive. You adapt pretty quickly. > And of course it doesn't make the meeting any shorter. This is 100% true. It makes them longer and slows down decision making. But it also tends to mean that decisions can be made (and are recorded right in the doc!) in one meeting instead of multiple meetings, since the main thoughts are already written down. To be clear, I'm not saying it's a good idea. I found most of the meetings run that way to be a waste, because they indexed on "every meeting starts with a document" even when it wasn't necessary. But it might be helpful to try it for one or two meetings where you are wasting a lot of time talking about things that could have been written down.

ashfernandez 3y ago

Works for some companies (i.e. Amazon), but many hate doing this. I'm making it such that if someone preps a meeting they HAVE to assign a responsible person for each and every talking point. When they do this, that person gets a notice saying they have something to prepare ahead of time for. SO even if they don't have enough time to look at the whole agenda, they can easily identify what exactly they need to pinpoint-prep for.