3 ms·

One of the mentors at the Founder Institute had a really good advice for running meetings (board meetings or any management meeting or staff meeting). I can't f

One of the mentors at the Founder Institute had a really good advice for running meetings (board meetings or any management meeting or staff meeting). I can't find a link to it right now, but it goes like this: - asynchronously (wiki or other technology), update everyone before the meeting - synchronously (meaning face-to-face, the actual meeting), you are not allowed to say something that you didn't write down on the wiki, unless it's a question. Consequence: the catching up of information is done asynchronously before the meeting, not wasting anyone's time, freeing up the meeting for actual brainstorming and problem-resolution.

RiderOfGiraffes 17y ago
> you are not allowed to say something that > you didn't write down on the wiki, unless > it's a question. Or presumably unless it's the answer to a question. You also need a time embargo on updates to the wiki (or whatever) before the meeting, otherwise everyone spends the 5 minutes before the meeting typing furiously, and no one has the chance to read things. Having said that, I'm pushing for something very like this. I'm frustrated with pointless, rambling meetings that appear to achieve nothing, so I'm insisting every meeting has an agenda, action points, reviews of previous action points, and a stated purpose in the form of a question to answer or decision to reach. My colleagues thought I was being totally anal, but I've gone around recently and asked their opinions about recent meetings and the point is made - they now believe the meetings are shorter, more useful, and achieve things. It is, however, basically the much scorned traditional committee meeting rules. Evolution in action.