An alphabet of five letters

Amy Storrow
Aug 22, 2017 · 4 min read

In my thirteen years with the State Department, I’ve been to about 670 meetings that follow a form, more or less, that I call “Primates In The Forest,” PITF for short.

The meeting begins with the assembled crowd waiting for the highest-ranking person. Upon arrival, that person sits at the head of a conference table. Those higher in formal rank sit nearest to her, those lower at the opposite end, and the lowest sit in less fancy chairs along the wall. (Of course, informal rank is another story.) The highest-ranking person often opens the meeting by giving a read-out of another meeting in which the other participants were higher-ranking still, where our fearless leader was, we hope, at least mid-table. After the read-out is finished, participants report on what their teams are doing. The leader calls on those who signal with a wave or by raising their hand, generally making sure to choose the higher-ranking people first. If there’s time at the end, people from the margins talk.

Generally most people are brief, but sometimes they go on and on. Usually this happens, I think, if the speaker feels like it’s the only time someone will listen (or at least pretend to listen) to what he says, or if he’s very excited by what he has to share, or if he’s new and misunderstands the form, or if he’s just obtuse. In a room full of, say, 50 people, “Primates in The Forest” tends to last about 45 minutes.

It’s always reminded me that we are mammals indeed, and the ones at the conference table (that is, in the clearing) bear careful watching by those on the perimeter (in the trees).

If you asked most people what the purpose of that meeting is, many would snort and say, “wasting time?” There’s some truth there, but there’s also bravado: it’d be uncool to like this particular meeting, just as it’d be uncool not to sigh in agreement and relief when someone says TGIF in the elevator. PITF provides context for the work we do, makes sure that we are oriented towards and feel connected to the larger mission. When it is managed poorly, the room has a low-level buzz of boredom and anxiety. When it is managed very well, PITF can have a cozy, family feel. We’re all in it together, there in our green glen, grooming each other for fleas. We leave less itchy and ready for what’s next.

PITF is a status report, one of the five conventional meeting forms identified in The Surprising Power of Liberating Structures by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless, a book with a title so touchy-feely that most State Department people would flinch and look away from it out of pity. Nevertheless, it’s the most useful book on meetings I’ve read so far. (And wow are there many!) The five “conventional methods” its authors identify are the presentation, the managed discussion, the status report, the open discussion, and the brainstorm. They liken these five forms to an alphabet with just five letters and then offer thirty-three more. These thirty-three are the “liberating structures” that, when used in various combinations, can greatly improve the performance of organizations, whether they’re multinational corporations or families. Check out the menu.

As you can see from the chart to the left, liberating structures allow everyone to participate, and they distribute control. There are managers out there, I’m sure, who are thinking right now, “And why would I want that?” Well, it depends on your purpose. If you want to appear transparent but in fact want to force an outcome, liberating structures are not for you — or not for the you of right now. But I have hope for you in the future!

Of those mentioned, I’ve used troika consulting and 25/10 crowd sourcing (which we renamed “10x Bolder”) the most, often in regional training seminars, and recommend them heartily. I think every team should do TRIZ at least once a year. I never completely replaced conventional structures with liberating ones, in part because I am sucker for open conversation in a group that is very comfortable with itself.

For a while, my last team alternated a fairly conventional weekly status report and open conversation blend with “meeting lab,” in which one of us chose a liberating structure and ran the meeting. Some liked this practice more than others. We ended up generating far more ideas than we could implement. I didn’t mind — the universe is full of ideas and some are more beautiful than stars — but others did. We also found that we missed the more unstructured team “together time” and didn’t have as good a sense of what each person was working on. So maybe we also need to keep those five letters, as well.

I’ve been talking to some folks in other industries and sectors, and I know that not only are there are a lot of letters out there, there are also whole other alphabets. I’ve seen Primates in the Forest, but I have yet to see, oh, Termites on a Tree or Flourishing Coral Reef or Galloping Giraffes. And then there’s the issue of how meetings fit into the work ecosystem overall. So much fun.

)

Amy Storrow

Written by

Foreign Service Officer. Most of the entries before September 2018 focus on meetings and organizational design. Later ones will run the gamut.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade