3 ms·
Group Decisions
- ChrisMarshallNY 3y agoThis is very familiar, to me. I worked for a Japanese corporation, and their meetings were like this. And we had lots of meetings. I believe we had too many.
- bluepizza 3y agoThe fundamental assumption that people will collaborate towards an ideal solution is blissfully naïve. Difficulties in reaching an agreement are not about people's personal ups and downs. It's politics and pecking order. People will fight for choices that puts them in advantageous positions. Politics underpins all social dynamics.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cess11 3y agoEvery decent meeting has a clear agenda communicated with related documents well in advance, a chairperson (usually the one booking the meeting) responsible for shutting down any distractions from the current issue in the agenda, and a secretary that takes notes regarding decisions that will be sent to the participants afterwards. Every good meeting has all of the above and lasts less than thirty minutes. In practice it guarantees that stakeholders and participants clear things up and does the thinking and deciding before the meeting and don't waste time doing it in public, and the meeting turns into a quick formal event where majorities or consensus is documented. People who want to have vague discussions about this and that in meetings should probably be offered therapy or some kind of educational course.