Administrators, support staff, teachers, and other personnel spend countless hours each year in meetings. We meet to plan and review policies and programs, discuss student issues and services, design curricula, collaborate on instructional issues, engage in professional learning, and accomplish a variety of other purposes. Yet how often do we leave these meetings feeling that the time was truly well spent? Too many meetings produce polite conversation, little clarity, and minimal forward motion.
The fact is that time is a precious resource, and we need to protect and use it well. Time spent in meetings needs to yield results that reflect the investment they represent. The question is: How can we structure and conduct meetings to produce outcomes that make them worthwhile and to accomplish what may be difficult or impossible if done through other means?
Fortunately, there are several relatively simple and straightforward strategies we can employ to increase the value of meetings and ensure worthy outcomes. Here are five characteristics that most often lead to productive, satisfying team meetings.
The meeting’s purpose is clear, shared, and worthy. Attendees understand whether they will be asked to plan, problem solve, decide, or engage in another process. They know what is expected of them and what success will look like. Further, they understand that the meeting will address an issue or problem that is meaningful and worth addressing. Consequently, attendees arrive with shared expectations and are ready to engage.
Psychological safety is accompanied by expectations for accountability and engagement in intellectual challenge. Psychological safety can lead people to feel comfortable, but comfort alone does not lead to creativity and productivity. Shared norms of respect, trust, and the assumption of positive intentions provide a context for honest conversation. Shared accountability encourages all participants to contribute meaningfully. A focus on a worthy problem, significant challenge, or interesting idea invites cognitive engagement and can stimulate creativity.
Diversity of perspective and opinion is valued, encouraged, and expected. Disagreement and dialogue often surface ideas, implications, and options that can be overlooked when agreement is immediate and unchallenged. Diversity of thought helps expose false and unhelpful assumptions and test the implications and potential of options. When agreement seems to emerge from the outset of the discussion, it can be useful to designate one of the meeting participants to challenge the group’s thinking and even propose alternatives for consideration.
Power balances are recognized and managed. When people who are perceived as leaders or with authority speak first, other meeting members are more likely to agree, not speak, or wait until after the meeting to disagree privately. Instead, formal leaders might serve as clarifiers, questioners, and evidence seekers throughout discussions. When leaders speak last, they have the benefit of having heard the discussion and evaluated information, evidence, and options. Consequently, their participation can serve to summarize and confirm what has been discussed as they weigh in on outcomes.
Follow-up action items and next steps are clear, worthwhile, time-bound, and assigned. Stimulating discussions and important decisions can be compromised or lost without appropriate follow-up. The meeting wrap-up should include a list of what has been decided, who will be responsible for any next steps or supporting actions, when actions will be taken, and how progress will be measured and communicated. Effective meeting closure can prevent the need to repeat key discussions, revisit past decisions, and address uncertainty about the meeting's impact. Clear task assignments can also create ownership of what happens next.
To ensure a meeting is worthwhile and productive, we might ask attendees to share a brief reflection. Rate each item on a 1-5 scale:
-
Was the purpose of the meeting clear and worthwhile?
-
Did the meeting feature psychological safety and intellectual challenge?
-
Did the meeting include diverse perspectives and opinions as well as the testing of assumptions and options?
-
Did everyone participate, and was power balanced throughout discussions?
-
Did we leave knowing what will happen next, by whom, and when?
Any items receiving a score of less than 4 signals the need for review and improvement.
Meetings are expensive, and they should serve as valuable time to accomplish work that is best done in a group context. In short, meetings are important; they are worth doing well. If you have any doubts about whether a meeting was worth it, ask yourself this question: Could that have been an email?
