Just read Joe Wynne's Too Many Meetings article and was prompted by the line at the bottom about the meetings we hate the most. Mine is a monthly project review that I run on behalf of the General Manager who also holds two other (competing roles)- head of Product Marketing and interim Director of Engineering (we've been without the latter for 12+ months).
Our meeting suffers from a lack of clear purpose - the multi-tasking GM can't decide if it's to be an engineering review (how it started) or a management/marketing review (he'd prefer). But we really have no other mechanism for division-wide engineering reviews and, more importantly, very limited opportunities for Project Managers to grab the attention of the GM (who is the go-to guy for escalation on problem areas).
So...how do other people do it? How do you get adequate visibility for projects, relevant status reporting, sharing of cross-project issues (particularly resource allocation) without the meeting turning into a complete nightmare and dreaded time-waster for all involved? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
John ZacharProduct Dev Manager| Association for Project Management (APM)Brackley,, Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
I tend not to do it in a meeting!
When I manage projects, I create project visibility; in most cases I use a wall or walls to display project information.
Creating a list of project deliverables (products), and then RAGing them (red amber green) will indicate project progress / achievement. Creating a list of issues (issues in my book don't belong in the project but to those outside the project where I need help) and posting on the wall in easy to read typeface, with responsibilities, dates etc. has a tendancy to draw attention.
I also use dependency diagrams, with an appropriate number of nodes, say =< 50, spread out over time to create a high level schedule, and RAG the nodes.
Milestone charts, cumulative spend (and then revealing how much is left to complete the project) charts, perhaps using earned value as well all help to carry the message.
In some cases this has been reduced to a digital format and either e-mailed or posted on an intranet.
You might still have the problem of attracting attention. I know it sound corny, but using big pictures and bright colours will cause people to investigate; and once they see the kid of info that can be gained from examination, the problem usually is getting rid of them.
Visibility is the key! Saving Changes...
Larry HanthornPrincipal Account Delivery Executive| Microsoft CorporationPella, Ia, United States
There is a great book by Patrick Lencioni entitled Death By Meeting. In it he outlines a strategy for the types of meetings and how to best run them. For the most part a meeting is "good" when it involves drama, ie: conflict. There are also major differences between Strategy meetings and Tactical meetings - a good PM will know how to do both and they don't mix very well. Sounds to me like yours are getting mixed together. Think about this and consider getting the book. Saving Changes...
Mark Price PerryBusiness Driven PMO Evangelist| BOT InternationalOrlando, Fl, United States
Dear Anonymous, nice post and replies. We do it very much like Mr. Zachar outlined. We maintain visibility by way of a dashboard for top projects and in our meetings we have a one page "top sheet" that provides a consistent approach for quick executive review of the project status report items. We keep each PM to 5 minutes to report on the project status and any key issues. All of this is maintained online for review by others, management, team members, etc. The key, as you pointed out, lies in having a clear purpose for the meeting. Your GM can still have multi-tasking or multi-focus as part of the meeting objective and agenda. Ideally, a monthly review meeting would be enthusiastic, energetic, and enjoyable. If such a meeting is dreaded, then there might very well be other factors and issues. Good luck. -- Mark Perry, VP of Customer Care, BOT International Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Like each of the posters, I have been to meetings where a lot was discussed but nothing was accomplished. These meetings began cutting into the productive parts of my day, so, in certain strategic meetings, I finally put my foot down. Initially, I began by ASKING that a specific agenda be included in meetings invitations. If the meeting came off agenda, or was heading away from team goals, I would interrupt and put things back on track. After a breaking in period, I began REQUIRING the agenda and ensuring that it was followed, Eventually, along with the required agenda, I began reserving the right to quit the meeting if discussion got too far off track. So far, I have only left a meeting once and not before I had redirected discussion several times. I would also add that, in each of the meetings I chose to do this, I was a not facilitating the meeting but was a necessary contributor to it's outcome. In situations where I did not feel that I had the power to walk out of a meeting, I began to question whether I needed to be there in first place. It may seem a bit extreme, but sometimes stubborn problems require extreme solutions. Recently, I have noticed that several key people in my organization have been doing the same thing. Perhaps efficiency will catch on after all. Saving Changes...
