Posted by Meetings
Meetings
The term “meeting” encompasses the gathering and discussion where adherence to certain formats and rules enables efficient decision-making on various agendas through the principle of majority rule. It also refers to the institutions that regularly hold such types of gatherings.
Meetings should involve all members, aiming for the best policies through opinion and information exchange. Thus, gatherings convened merely for announcing opinions, commands from superiors, or information dissemination do not qualify as meetings. The concept of meetings emerged with the inception of communal living, especially as unified action became necessary in labor.
In management, a “meeting body” refers to an organization formed by multiple members, making decisions or communicating following a meeting format.
Meetings are a potential method for advancing projects or generating creative ideas. Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple, put significant effort into making meetings efficient. Let’s explore our meeting culture through Steve Jobs’ three principles for effective meetings.
3S Meeting Rule
3S Meeting Rule
Steve Jobs
- Small List: Limit the number of participants. [Ideally between 3-5] Having too many participants often leads to unproductive meetings. More people means more potential for disruption and misunderstanding.
- Short Agenda: Reduce the agenda. [Up to 3 items] Numerous agendas can diminish individual thinking time, making it difficult to focus and increasing the likelihood of impromptu conversations.
- Short Length: Keep meetings brief. [Within 30 minutes] There’s a limit to how long people can concentrate, which is why there are designated class periods in schools. It’s crucial to conduct discussions within a timeframe that allows for focused debate.
Reflecting on Weekly Part Meeting
The meeting involved the leader, sub-leader(2 people), and three members, totaling 5 participants. There were initially four agendas, but two were simple reports, allowing for focused discussion on two main issues. The discussion of two agendas took about 1.3 hours.
Based on this, although the meeting duration was long, the number of participants and agendas was appropriate. Considering the time spent:
- About 40% of the time was used to empathize with and assess the issue.
- Approximately 30% of the time was devoted to discussing methods for further analysis of the issue.
- Around 30% of the time was spent discussing work priorities, additional considerations, and collaboration with other parts.
Upon reflection, although the meeting was somewhat lengthy, it seemed efficient. For more effective meetings, clearly summarizing and sharing the issues to be discussed could improve efficiency. The meeting sometimes lacked focus on identifying causes due to the disorganized discussion of issues.
Arriving at the meeting with a brief report on agenda items also seems to help focus during the meeting.