Perhaps the best corporate joke about meetings is, that is held to be counted as the best alternative to doing any work. Like a principle of physics, meetings fill up all the available space on your diary; in fact, these expand and have greatest element of elasticity in relation to time.
Meetings are essentially meeting of minds of a group of people; or it can be a simple one on one meeting. The thread of their togetherness has to have some common objectives and concern, to discuss, deliberate and take decision. Where meetings are held to fill available time, the results of such meetings is best described in Persian, “Nashitan, Guftan, Qurdan and Barkshatun”. Loosely rendered into English, it means, “Gather, speak, eat and disperse”. Nothing is meant to be achieved in such meetings. The length of a meeting rises with the square of the number of people present (NYT).
The need for meetings can emerge from the bed rock of regulatory frame work or from internal policies of an entity. Like, under the code of corporate governance, the board of directors must meet at the end of each quarter. An internal working group can as part of their respective terms of reference hold a meeting on a pre-determined periodic basis. In addition to these meetings on a pre-determined periodic basis can be with clients, vendors, other stakeholders etc.; impromptu contextual meetings are also done to attend an immediate aspect of business or an issue requiring instant resolution.
The Newyork Herald Tribune (1960) carried the comment from Richard Harkness, “what is a committee? A group of the unwilling, picked from the unfit, to do the necessary”. Following from this it is important to select the right persons on to a meeting, working group etc.; the individual so nominated must not necessarily be an SME (Subject Matter Expert) but in the minimum must have basic knowledge, adequate enough to make a meaningful participation during the course of discussion. A banker friend of mine went to attend a conference on “nuclear medical radiology” on behalf of the nation, to Beijing. Yes, that’s true!.
The meeting must have a purpose to achieve. No meeting should be allowed in a board room that starts to resemble a political public meeting. This nature of slide has to be controlled by the chairperson. A meeting that keeps the minutes but loses hours, is a purposeless moot. The chair person must necessarily possess the art of homogenize the thinking of the participants.
The first step towards making a meeting successful is, to have a proper ‘agenda’ framed. The question here is, who should prepare the ‘agenda’? The secretary of the board/committee; The chairman or should it be the participants? In my personal experience I have relied on the principle of seeking opinion/ /feedback of the members, through the Secretary and also from the rank and file of the organization, to learn of what they see as areas of concern, improvement, attention and correction. The secretary then compiles the recommended items of agenda, and the chairman, with or without consultation, with the constituents, decides to prioritize and include to have an agenda. Some chairpersons I have seen choose at this stage, to circulate the agenda to the members for their concurrence. In my view, this shouldn’t be done, because it opens up a can of worms, of “what else” to include or delete; and the exercise can be time consuming. It is best, upon receipt of items from across the organization, the secretary and the chairman, should conclude agenda items.
Every committee has permanent members, but there are at times invitees too, for specific agenda items. These invites must just attend discussion on their relevant item of agenda and must leave; if they don’t voluntarily, the chair must ask them to do so! Invitees themselves should avoid embarrassment. The purpose to have invitees to the meeting mustn’t be other than seeking expert view. Some chairpersons also extend invitations to bring forth corporate optic illusions; to make the invitee feel important or for the rest of the organization to give him the attention or sometimes blatantly, the chair may wish to demonstrate closeness to one or more colleagues. Such invitations are politically motivated corporate stunts! Agenda shouldn’t be akin to development of what you would end up purchasing from the shelves, while pushing your shopping carts through the aisles of the mall. It must be pre-determined, what needs to be deliberated, instead of letting the proceedings to meander through unrelated subjects, taking the meeting to nowhere. The agenda should be simply worded but iron casted of course, it must include date, time and venue. Agenda constitution helps the participants to come prepared and it also assists the Chairperson to keep the meaning focused; it logicalizes issues to be dealt with, while also prioritizing the impelling issues.
The nature of meeting will determine when the agenda and related papers should be dispatched to members for board and its sub-committees. The regulatory requirement is to forward them at least seven days before the scheduled date of meeting. For in-house meetings 3-4 days could be sufficient. Sometimes a one-point agenda, requiring call for an immediate decision, can motivate the holding of the meeting.
The first item on the agenda and possibly the most important is confirmation of minutes of the previous meeting. The chair must seek its approval from the members. Rarely have I seen members go beyond pointing typo’s errors – a dilemma of revealing the obvious and concealing the vital. The minute must be signed, manually or electronically. I believe to sign manually every single page is best to do.
“Matters arising” is usually the second item taken up by the committee/board. This item is dependent on how accurately and precisely where the minutes of the previous meeting recorded. Only from earlier meetings do “matters arise”. If these are simple enquiries, the chair may choose to settle it then and there; but if it seeks detailed response, it can easily slide in as an agenda item.
On the agenda, the last item is usually titled as, “other matters with the permission of the chair” or simply, “other items”. This in my view is the most dangerous element on the agenda; it may sound nnocius but could be deadly, by implication. The urge on the part of the chair or the participant to whom the item could relate, may deliberately put the most serious of issues requiring decision making, under the head of “other items”; what should or may have been a perfect subject to qualify as a separate agenda item, is marked away under, “other items/any other matter”. What essentially happens for such “other items” is that they receive no importance or attention. Since this is the last item on the agenda – the interest of the participants would have most likely waned – to the degree of dis-interestedness. Consequently, a decision is imposed. The minutes in such cases will record with accuracy all “other items” in detail.
The chairperson, without really indulging into disclosure of his/her reasons, can decide dedication of time for each agenda item. Alternatively, he can time out any prolonged discussion.
The tendency to move away from the Agenda must be checked by the chairperson, and if he fails or personally indulges, then it should be the responsibility of the members, to put the meeting back on rails. Small talk, jokes, anecdotes, may be good up to a limited extent, but an over dosage can seriously render the meeting into a session of humour and story-telling only. Falstaff’s should be checked. As charity covers a multitude of sins before God, so does politeness before men (Granville). At no point should the language or discussion fall below standards of grace. Simplicity is the supreme excellence when it relates to character, style speech and demeanor. At meeting, one should speak what is necessary, neither more, nor less.
The secretary or the minute taker must be an active individual, who should seek clarity from the chair, especially if there is long, endless & conflicting debate, on any subject. It is usually from the notes taken during the meeting that a secretary draws the minutes – but not everything or the notes may justify a mention in the minutes. The secretary should exercise discretion with mature honesty.
Minutes should be short and written in business English. Typically, the participants names should be mentioned. Then come to the body of the minute that would detail in logical order, that is in sync with the agenda, the ensued discussion and the related decision taken.
For achieving accuracy and for obtaining the objectives of the meeting, it is best for the draft minutes to be written and sent to the chair and participants within seven days of the meeting. The minute shouldn’t be a record of who said what, but a record of what was discussed and decided. The timelines for execution of decisions made should be clearly stated.
Minutes in my personal view shouldn’t be a record of who said, what and who replied to the many what’s? And then who decided. Instead it should be a short script of issue discussed and the decision taken.
While speaking at the meeting all members must remain cognizant of the distinction between straight forwardness and rudeness; straightforwardness must be exercised with discipline, honor and propriety. Little said is easily amended. A lot said becomes irrevocable. Speak only when it is better in comparison to silence. There is an Italian proverb, “from listening comes wisdom and from speaking repentance”. Voice that indulges in speaking is the second face of a man. Never allow yourself to envy the dumb, post your speech or comment. Be guarded.
The writer is a freelance columnist
