How can we make meetings great again? Or for the first time?
Language is such a magical thing. The ability we have to create magnificent images of the past, present, and future and share them with one another by emitting vibrations of air that we perceive as sounds, marvels me. We share and create a common sense of reality by talking to each other through a complex system or dance of symbols and meanings. Communication is what, evolutionary speaking, we developed to help us share our own little universe with one another to survive and thrive. It is not a bulletproof method and misunderstandings and conflict constantly appear in our lives, but because each of us is a separate unit of perception (an individual), and we need each other to achieve our goals, we keep at it, talking to one another in a myriad different contexts and situations.
What we have seen in the last few decades, and especially the past couple of years, is that social media and online technologies have revolutionized the ways we communicate. The devices that act as interfaces between us have changed the way we interact with one another. Even though technology has allowed us to work from home, work remotely and work asynchronously, a lot of the subtle (unconscious) embodied markers such as the muscular tone, the position of our bodies, the odors, are lost online. New technological challenges have appeared for all of us but have proven especially challenging for organizations with older staff and poor IT support. The impact of this rapid change of the means and ways of interacting with each other has been particularly felt in online meetings.
In the work we do as consultants, we are regularly asked to support teams with exactly this: Meetings. Well, actually most teams that come to us don’t really know what the specific problems they are facing are, but what they know is that they experience difficulties in talking to one another, working together, and especially coordinating actions effectively. They experience that the difficulties they are having are also affecting their wellbeing and commitment to the work.
Teams feeling these things, both in the non-profit sector and from private companies, often request training on communication. Be it with a focus on non-violent, mindful, or wellbeing-focused communication, their requests were clear, but during our initial calls, it became clear to us that their understanding of the problems they were facing was not commonly agreed within the team, nor complete.
In some cases, team members spoke about meetings that lead nowhere and that left people feeling frustrated, others mentioned a certain sense of toxic internal competition among colleagues, some of them also talked about how the priorities and leadership styles from their supervisors, management teams, and/or leadership contributes to fuel the sense of competition among colleagues and other problems.
It is common to hear among the teams we are supporting, that what they might refer to as a “certain tone” in the way they talk to one another, instead of bringing people together, can create animosity and feelings of isolation, impacting the action coordination and teamwork.
Teamwork happens through communication. We work together by having conversations, and especially working online, we have those conversations in meetings. Those meetings that go nowhere and the conflicts that arise when feelings of frustration are present have real effects on the way people feel and trust one another and the effectiveness of a team. Most of the time, to improve the way teams prepare, host, and follow up on meetings, we need to have a deeper perspective of the culture of each team, but one of the trends we’ve found in most of our clients is that the problems they are having during the meetings are caused by unaligned expectations and misunderstandings around the type of conversation they are currently having.
What do we mean by that?
Imagine this example. A team gets together to plan a project. Some team members expect to come out from the meeting with clear decisions, action plans, and roles; others believe the meeting is a first brainstorming of ideas, and others might feel there are underlying issues in the team’s way of working that need to be addressed before making any decision on the project. We are sure you have lived a version of this. Everyone has.
What normally happens in these cases is that people with different expectations start to push the meeting in different directions, power dynamics may come into play or confusion reigns and people leave the meeting with different understandings of the outcomes and agreements. If power dynamics flare up, and the person with the higher position within that hierarchy decides what to talk about and sets the priorities, participants with other expectations are left feeling not seen, not taken into consideration, nor acknowledged.
What other scenarios are possible?
The “4 different types of conversations” model taught by the Newfield Network in its coaching certification course (ACP), is a powerful method that helps teams to host effective meetings, coordinate actions effectively, identify when it is important to take a step back, and look at the big picture and/or create the space to open difficult conversations.
The 4 different types of conversations are:
1) Conversations about opinions. Valuable conversations to share and gather meaningful information.
Through these conversations, we share our opinions and judgments. We are not making decisions just informing one another on the facts and opinions that each knows or feels relevant.
2) Conversations about possibilities. After deciding that you have enough information about a topic or issue, the conversation about possibilities allows teams to determine which of the many possibilities of action are plausible and realistic (depending on the context and other factors such as time and financial resources).
Through these conversations, teams negotiate, talk about resources, strategic priorities, etc. to make an informed decision.
3) Conversation about action coordination. Once a decision is made, e.g. to go ahead with a project, the “action coordination” conversation guides teams to engage in the dance of requests, offers, negotiations, and promises. We start talking about who does what by when.
Teams that are good at articulating promises and being accountable to one another are normally teams that achieve their goals regularly. Knowing the action coordination cycle helps teams to improve their abilities to articulate promises and is necessary to learn how to give and receive feedback.
4) Conversation about possible conversations. This type of conversation opens the possibility for teams to take a step back and reflect on the effectiveness of the way they are communicating with one another and make decisions regarding the process they are using and not necessarily the issue.
Everyone has felt disconnected during a meeting. Imagine that you are bold enough to say: “Sorry everyone, I feel disconnected. Don’t know why but I’m having trouble staying present. Is anyone else feeling something similar?” This line of question puts the group on a different level. They stop looking at the issue (the objective of the meeting) and start focusing on the group itself and the process (the conversation) they are in. It opens the possibility for them to change their ways of relating, communicating, and working.
Teams that are conscious and as explicit as possible about which of these 4 types of conversations they are having at which point of a meeting, show improvement in the ways they work together, and their meetings become, in general, more effective.
How can this model improve the way your teams host meetings?
Before the meeting.
Plan the agenda. To send participants the main topics in advance and agree with them the expected outcomes is always a good practice. For this to work, someone should be accountable for the meeting and responsible for making this happen. This responsibility can be rotated around the team, to ensure shared ownership.
At the beginning of the meeting
Decide who is who. Distribute roles. Who will moderate and facilitate, who will take notes, who will keep track of time? etc. These roles support people to feel responsible for the outcomes of the meeting and support them to remain connected and that their presence is valuable.
Go over the agenda and agree on expected outcomes. You will be surprised to know how often people come to meeting with completely different expectations. Aligning expectations upfront ensures a much higher likelihood of success.
We also recommend that as part of the check-in about expectations, participants are invited to share anything else which is affecting them and relevant to share for their colleagues to understand how they might be during the meeting. This can be anything from “I slept 2 hours because of my newborn” to “I’m feeling a lot of pressure because of the way our last project ended, so I’m a bit sensitive in this meeting” to “I’m really excited about this next phase and have lots of ideas, but I’m aware we’re not all at the same level on this, so I need to slow down a bit”. This can be crucial for the team’s wellbeing and focus, and should also not become an endless, group therapy round.
During the meeting
Once the expected outcomes are agreed upon and anything which needs to be “put on the table” has been mentioned, it is time to decide what is the best type of conversation to use at which point of the meeting to achieve the outcomes. Do we need to make a decision on a key issue? Let’s assess first if we have enough information, if we know the risks and if all the important stakeholders are present.
Don’t forget to take a step back and check on how the process (the conversation is going). Are some participants disconnected? Are we making sure to stick to the agenda or are new topics popping up that derail the conversation? How are people feeling because of that? Normally, this is a task for the facilitator/moderator, but everyone should be responsible for flagging something when they notice it. When someone mentions that they are feeling frustrated and/or disconnected, it doesn’t mean the meeting needs to stop until the person feels differently. It means that our awareness about what is going on is enhanced and that now we can decide to do something about it.
At the end of the meeting
Provide space (we call it a “check-out”) for people, to share the next steps each took but also how people are feeling regarding the process. If someone feels that they are feeling negative emotions, make sure this person receives follow-up and the proper support.
Conclusions
Communication and the problems around it are a key variable that has deep and profound effects on the way that teams work and how individuals feel within those teams and organizations. Being aware of the impact the way of communicating is having on the wellbeing and effectiveness of a team is always a good investment.
But in order to provide effective solutions to the problems a team is having, it is important to have concrete and simple tools that can support teams to improve their interactions without creating too many procedures. Talking to one another is the only way to work as a team. Being good at communicating can make the difference between an average team and a high-performance team. Hosting effective meetings and giving and receiving feedback is key for team members to feel they can open difficult conversations with colleagues without suffering negative consequences. For that, team members need to learn how to engage with each other while taking care of each other, how to create safe spaces to have triggering conversations. And how to express their emotions without staying stuck in them.
