All this article does is summarize four types of meetings from a book, then goes on to say most meetings lack conflict, yet gives no guidance on how to create that conflict besides “use our tool to get data.”
The question of how to keep people’s attention in a meeting is interesting. Beyond having a purpose for the meeting and the right people there, what do others do to keep people engaged, especially during remote meetings?
I think I can provide you with a good example. For instance, on Weekly Staff meeting team usually reviews its metrics. One of the metrics we review is a Queue Length(number of tickets at a specific stage). From the dashboard, we see that InProgress queue is growing the second week in a row. In this case, we start a fruit-full discussion on how to reduce it. If we can't find an answer on the meeting we should continue on Adhoc Topical meeting. For this meeting, we can assign a couple of people to dig deep in the topic and prepare some data and solutions for Adhoc Topical. Does it make sense to you?
6 comments
[ 81.8 ms ] story [ 832 ms ] threadThe question of how to keep people’s attention in a meeting is interesting. Beyond having a purpose for the meeting and the right people there, what do others do to keep people engaged, especially during remote meetings?
All it does it tell us that important meetings lack conflict, then advertise its services, which are not related to meetings at all.