Who the hell invented meetings?
Yes, yes, I know. Face-to-face meetings have been the bête noir of the business world for a long time now and lots of people have cashed in on trying to alleviate the scourge-of-the-meeting-syndrome, including such famous actors like John Cleese in his 1980s guise with Video Arts and subsequently in his own training company. 
But much as people have loathed meetings for many years, we‘re still saddled with them.
And that’s despite a whole raft of recent technology designed to reduce the need for people to get together face-to-face by using audio or audio plus video live linkups anywhere in the world. Ask the average senior executive why they still need F2F meetings with all this stuff around to do it electronically, and they say “well, er, it’s just not the SAME as getting everyone physically together.”
Consequently, companies still expect their staff to get into eco-filthy cars or aircraft and travel long distances to analyse and discuss what probably could have been sorted out in one longish teleconference call. Organisations still make their senior executives waste days of either productive work or private recreation time driving more dirty miles to stand in a muddy field with a team of equally bored colleagues figuring out how to make a raft out of bamboo poles and old toilet rolls. In the public sector, particularly, admin staff have so many meetings to attend that they need to work overtime just to do the jobs they were hired to do.
Considering that these days we’re meant to be cutting back on wasted time and money in addition to minimising unnecessary, planet-polluting business travel, why on earth does this pandemic of meeting-itis still exist – never mind keep growing? Here are a few of my theories…
-
The executive mentioned above who thinks tele or video conferencing is just not the “same” as getting people together F2F is right. It isn’t. It’s a cleaner, more efficient and more modern way to do it. But he doesn’t get to sit at the head of the table and shout down or shut up dissenters with anything like the same sense of theatre. The F2F meeting is a bully’s paradise.
- Senior executives/bosses/heads of organisations (who call many meetings) are not normally the bright 12-year-olds who know the new technologies like the backs of their hands, but refuse to admit that they are either Luddites or technodorks, or both. The old goat Chairman may say he prefers the holistic approach to team problem solving that’s only possible in a F2F meeting, but actually he’s probably frightened fartless that he’ll hit the wrong button on the equipment and the toupée will get blown off his head.
- Calling and attending F2F meetings provides some people with a very convenient way to fill in the working day, so justifying their job which otherwise would have become redundant years ago. Tele and video conferences tend to be much, much shorter…
And so-on. What are your views on this?
Image credits, Vladimir Prelovac
About Special GuestBirds on the Blog welcomes Guest Bloggers of all abilities, if you have something to say and you wish to share it with us - get in touch
View all posts by Special Guest →
13 Responses to Who the hell invented meetings?
All that jazz – All in A Day
Review of: Cousin Alice Jazz Music by Cousin Alice: Elaine Sturgess Reviewed by: Elaine Sturgess Rating: 5 On January 21, 2012 Last modified: January 30, 2012 Summary: What makes Alice so distinctive is her wonderfully smokey voice, a quality that furniture designer William Yeoward found so arresting at a concert she was performing for the [...]
Pingback: Tweets that mention Who the hell invented meetings? | Birds on the Blog -- Topsy.com
It depends very much on the desired outcome of the meeting. I find it very difficult to travel anywhere these days, and do as much joint decision-mkaing as possible online or over the 'phone.
But if the purpose of the meeting is to build or strengthen the team, promote teamworking, brainstorm ideas or observe skills in practice, then face-to-face interaction is essential.
We used to have monthly face to face board meetings (thankfully the other directors come to me) but we realised that most decisions could be made using email and phone calls, so now only have quarterly face to face meetings.
We have lots of interaction with our wider team (who live all over the UK) but try to have one or two events a year when we all get together physically. This does have incredible benefits for all of us, but certainly those benefits would be outweighed by disadvantages if we held them more often.
We are required to physically attend tender short listing meetings, and I wish these could be done via online web conferencing – would save a fortune in travel costs and lots of time as well as being more eco friendly.
Twitter: evenbreak
Pingback: Tweets that mention Who the hell invented meetings? | Birds on the Blog -- Topsy.com
Isn't it amazing just how much business can be conducted successfully without F2F meetings, particularly when – as is your case, Jane – you have strong health reasons why you need to minimise your travel and sitting-around-a-table time?
In a way it's sad that it is health problems that oblige you to cut back on F2F meetings, but the upside is that the planet benefits and in all probability it saves you, your colleagues and your clients a lot of expensive executive time.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Face to Face meetings are still useful but would agree that in some cases there are misused and where necessary we should resort to technology. Thinking about travelling to meetings and having meetings about meetings- what a waste of time!
I used to hate meetings in the corporate world, largely because there were too many of them with little point or actions that came out of them. One way to reduce them and increase effectiveness is to limit them to one hour and spend the last 10 mins running through action items that result, allocate people to them with deadlines. Then send the short minutes out with this list so everyone is clear who is doing what.
As a consultant, I have much fewer meetings now and hopefully productivity is up! One tool I have found really useful is GoToMeeting (http://www.gotomeeting.com @gotomeeting). You can run through slides or spreadsheets on your computer remotely without having to attend in person. This works really well and saves everyone's time. Very cost effective too.
Twitter: maverickny
I'm a great believer in using alternative technology to avoid F2F meetings, especially for the Red Lion Group charity I work for. We generally have 3-4 hour long phone conferences a year, a get together at the end of the AGM and one F2F meeting about 2 months before the AGM. It's hard enough getting committee members to serve as it is, but would be impossible if people had to pay for their travel as well (there is no money from the charity). This way, people from all over the UK can be involved at no inconvenience to themselves.
The Nappy Lady has always been technology-dependent, and all communication is via email or phone.
I would agree with your various points about why so many F2F meetings happen, and it is my experience that where a woman rules the roost, alternatives tend to be more popular. Not because women don't like meeting people, but because they don't feel the need to bully!
As it happens, I am Chair of the Red Lion Group, starting this year, so our telephone conferences are going to be getting a hell of a lot shorter and sharper. I got sick of the last Chair thinking “Minutes of the last meeting” meant re-debating the last meeting before even moving on to the current one. Me suggesting a year-long plan for deadlines and things has caused a few upsets in amongst the cheers.
Absolutely, Ida. Meetings about meetings are especially ridiculous and I know they happen … nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that I do voluntary work within the NHS, of course…..
)
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Some great ideas there. Having a start AND a finish time for F2F meetings is essential, I would have thought – but it's surprising how many meetings still have no fixed end time and drag on for ages … typically last thing on a Friday afternoon….
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
I agree with you about women who chair meetings – we seem to be much better than men at weeding out the waffle and keeping things on schedule without browbeating or bullying the “meeters.” We're also less inclined to enjoy listening to the droning of our own voices and prefer to get the job done so we can move on to the next task…
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
A client was copied into an email from his employee to me the other day with regard to the telephone sales skills and territory creation, growth and long term management she's currently receiving from me (by course work and training by phone).
The employee is having a mild panic (as they often do) and the employer asked if there was any way I could “come in for a couple of hours to discuss?”
I could and will if necessary. Meanwhile I've emailed the client addressing all the points the employee has omitted to refer to… That took me an hour or so to put together and send off.
Though they're only on the edge of London, travelling to and from their premises (if I was driven door to door) would have added at least two hours – anything up to double that if I took public transport.
Conducting the meeting would have been an additional two hours.
For the amount I've charged the company for my course and my support for 4 weeks, the visit doesn't make economic sense unless there is likely to be continued work and, this time, involving the whole sales team – and that's a separate discussion.
It's sometimes great to have meetings: to meet 'in the flesh' people you've already built a good relationship with is fantastic. I've had clients where we've worked very closely on either their own development or one or more of their team's development.
Some of those clients I've NEVER met yet they've invested £thousands with me. We even joke that it's actually quite a relief if it's YOU working through what you REALLY want out of your business/ career/ etc. in our sessions (the other side that I currently concentrate on), to know that you're unlikely to bump into me walking down the street or in your local drinking establishment…
Twitter: Linda_Mattacks
Linda, you've hit the nail on the head. Although a client asking a supplier to “pop in for a chat for a couple of hours” may seem innocent enough, the bottom line is that the executive time involved for travel and sitting there can chew up and spit out any profitability that the supplier is counting on – especially in this day and age when costings have to be shaved to the bone just to win the bloody business in the first place.
Like you I've worked for clients I have never met F2F – in fact some for many years. Getting together F2F in business now should be seen as a luxury – a social “nice-to-have” – rather than as a necessity, other than in exceptional circumstances.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Pingback: Tweets that mention Who the hell invented meetings? | Birds on the Blog -- Topsy.com