Meetings – executives and directors all have them, but why and do we need to? Well I suppose so. I think there are 2 reasons: because they can be used to share information and ideas – sometimes, even in the 21st century, face-to-face is required; and – more interestingly to me – (sic) “because we do”. The workplace is full of meetings in all guises, it’s something we just do because we assume it’s vital. But is it?
Of course, some are. If you secure a huge contract, you will meet with the client – perhaps in an expensive restaurant. You will also meet with that client pre-contract, to see if you will fit (i.e. can you reel them in). Conversely – and noticeably in my trade – an increasing number of interviews and other meetings are held by tele- or video-conferencing: face-to-face is considered not (always) necessary.
Lindsay Wright of Lindsay Wright Associates the consultancy firm (http://www.lindsaywright.co.uk/) advises that “In general meetings are seen as effective if they: have a purpose, have a specific agenda, have a chair who controls the proceedings, have a structure and keep to the point, have someone who records the proceedings, keep to time, and make decisions if required”. Structure is critical otherwise it becomes the proverbial “talking shop”.
Whilst it is common for groups of people within a meeting to have preferences on solving an issue, there need to be parameters – steer if you will. If not, what’s the point? The meeting chairperson needs to keep all options on the table and foster an honest discussion. Encourage ideas to be backed up with data and information that is pertinent to the discussion. Avoid allowing personal preferences to cloud business decisions. One of the objectives of a business meeting is to allow all attendees to have a fair chance at having their ideas heard.
QCS (Quality Compliance Systems), a UK company involved in the healthcare sector, make an interesting point – largely about examples of meeting which are vital. “Partners / Doctors, Practice staff, Individual departments, Clinical staff, Complaints, Significant events, Patient participation, Safeguarding, Multidisciplinary (MDT) – end of life, community caseload, etc. However, it’s important to review which ones are vital to the running of the practice, what could be changed to make them more effective – even consolidating them – and how regularly they should take place” (https://www.qcs.co.uk/meetings-for-meetings-sake/).
Their point is of great interest because it highlights a sector where meetings are undoubtedly critical. Yet it also – almost by inference of exclusion of some parties – reiterates why some meetings are not (so?) important.
Which takes me to self-employed vs. employed. It’s important for all professionals to use their time efficiently. But it’s particularly essential for the self-employed (and arguably company staff working from home), who have far more discretion about how to structure their days.
Without corporate mandates such as weekly team meetings or biweekly project check-ins, entrepreneurs have the ability to wipe out bureaucratic red tape and reach new heights of productivity. But far too often they end up at the other extreme, frittering away their days because they’re unsure of how to manage their autonomy. My brother, a hard-working solicitor who is in the office by 7am, says if he worked from home he’d still be in his pyjamas at 11am!
Here are thoughts about how self-employed professionals can schedule meetings more effectively.
Make sure you understand the full cost of a meeting. Especially if you’re dealing with clients or colleagues who work in corporations. “Let’s have a meeting” may be the default response to any issue. That causes its own problems — one study showed the average employee (of 500 surveyed) spends up to 16 hours per week in meetings (http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/uk-workers-waste-year-lives-useless-meetings/article/1175002) – but logistically that’s not really a problem. Their employees are either on-site or can be conferenced in, so a 90-minute meeting takes 90 minutes. How much the waste of “life-time” might cost is a different thing! And even then, they often adopt a bonkers approach. My partner works for a large firm which is based in the UK. In 2017, where video conferencing and cloud-sharing are now king, they waste money flying people up and down the country for a 2-hour meeting. Like I say, bonkers.
But as a freelancer, I’m based at home (dressed, unlike my brother). From the outset and continuing, when I have clients on Skype or phone, the meeting is always scheduled for 60 minutes. The difficulty is that the time they actually last varies hugely and this therefore directly impacts productivity. Not only does the rollover cause potential clashes – 1 call running into the next – but the being taken “out of my zone” means I have to spend 5 minutes each time settling back into tapping the keyboard. If I could have a more accurate time estimate – which will never be possible since the client entirely controls the call – I could better understand and estimate the full cost to my productivity.
To that end, ideally, it’s essential to set ground rules for when a meeting is necessary. Clients love to schedule “check-in meetings,” where they update me on not only what they’ve done but how I’ve responded. It’s usually a total waste of my time and achieves nothing but if they go away thinking it was useful, what choice do I have? None. I believe it’s not a good use of anyone’s time but can’t exactly tell them that. I tend to ask pointed questions about their planned agenda – often they don’t even have one! I believe updates can and should be handled through email or online chat, and that we should only agree to “meet” if an important issue needs to be discussed and decided. Then we get into who decides what is important to them and me, and whether they’re the same.
Because I must offer all clients multiple diary options – I can’t really say “I will call you on Thursday at 3pm, be there” – I try to split the work into “call days” and those without any. Each allows, differently, for unfettered productive work where my focus is on one or the other. Of course, it’s important I am flexible and understand that some situations — unexpected news, an important client request — warrant breaking my patterns.
Meetings require active listening and participation but also a quick and thorough reading of the client’s emotional cues. This is important in my field because many clients have never used an external writing service and most have also come to me via Google so they are naturally wary from the start (is he going to run off with my cash). That’s why, where possible, it’s useful to standardise certain elements so I can focus more deeply on the task at hand. I used to be terrible at this – but then who isn’t terrible at many things in their job until they learn their value. I now take a very fixed and rigid approach – and, ironically perhaps, that in itself allows me to be more flexible with the client – because my own build factors in “assumption time” as I call it – the assumption that they will go off (my) piste. I’m rarely disappointed!
Many people complain about the endless meetings in a corporate environment. But even when they seem to quash productivity, they provide a structure to one’s day that’s lacking when you’re self-employed. Freelancers, blessed with this freedom, need to learn to deploy it wisely — and scheduling meetings effectively is one of the best places to start. It took me a while but I think I cracked it.
