Slashdot Mirror
Meetings are Bad For You
19061969 writes "Though this is obvious to most of us, your PHB's might benefit from knowing that meetings are bad for you. Two psychologists have found evidence that the number of and the time spent in meetings has a detrimental effect on mood. "...a general relationship between meeting load and the employee's level of fatigue and subjective workload was found", write the authors after conducting a diary study. Perhaps we should be more understanding with our moody bosses?"
Memo from your PHB
We need to have a meeting to discuss these findings!
Oh no... it's the future.
In other news, the sky is blue.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
"Perhaps we should be more understanding with our moody bosses?"
Perhaps not. Most meetings are scheduled by said moody bosses because they can't be bothered to read their email or meet one on one with the people who are actually getting work done. Sure, they're busy otherwise, but most of the reason they're busy is because of this meeting culture that equates sitting around a table talking about what you're going to have your minions do (as soon as they get out of the meetings you force them into) with getting code written and products shipped.
The main reason I hate meetings so much is because I get the impression that the only people getting anything out of them are the ones contributing nothing useful to the project in the first place. I don't care if your job is to sit between me and your boss, if you can't keep up with a project you're a part of without dragging me away from my actual work to hand-hold you through what's going on twice a week, you're wasting my time.
That was 90% of the meetings last place I worked, and this accounted for probably half the reason I got fed up with the place and quit before Christmas. Maybe I'm just not cut out to work somewhere that has more than a few employees, and I've never claimed to be a people person, but everybody I talked to felt much the same way, so I feel at least somewhat validated.
Face to face contact is great, but the instances where that face to face contact's value outweighs the cost of herding a bunch of people into a conference room for a chit chat are few and far between when there are deadlines to meet, IMHO.
Game... blouses.
I'm not sure I understand the findings. I know I'm always pleased when my boss "delegates" his full workload to me at a meeting.
This guy's the limit!
"Meetings are Bad For You" .. having an informal conversation with someone from a marketing Department for 5 minutes is bad enough.
No shit
Having to sit with them for an Hour as they drivel total Bullshit, is enough to give anyone a nervous breakdown
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Am I the only one that found this whole statement funny? I would think that they would release the paper to trade magazines and such to get their findings out, rather than waste time with meetings about how meetings are bad. That sounds like shooting yourself in the foot to me.
While number of meetings is important, I think that spending all day, every day in your office with no idea what anyone else is doing could be just as detrimental. I go to like 3 meetings a month so it takes me forever to find out what other people are doing.
...
I worked at a remote office for my previous employer. One time they flew me into their corporate headquarters to participate in a software replacement plan. I spent the better part of each day going from meeting to meeting. At the end of the last day I asked one of the people escorting me around "With all of these meetings how do y'all get any work done?" He looked at me seriously and said, "That's the idea." I went back to my remote world with even less respect for CHQ...
Something needs to be done about meetings... Perhaps more laws, counselling, medication... for the children.
I suggest you read Slashdot
A friend of mine told me once how badly their office was run.
The biggest problem, in his opinion, was the number of meetings that they had in order to discuss the projects they were working on. Frustration built up among employees due to not having enough time to actually do the work, as well as the number of times that he was interrupted in the middle of doing something productive - simply to go to another pointless meeting.
In his opinion, these meetings caused just as many problems as they tried to solve, and ironically, they would sometimes generate more meetings to discuss how far they were along in meeting their original deadlines.
I would tell you more about it, but I have a meeting to attend.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I read in Reader's Digest many years ago about a plant manager who loathed meetings. A worker was injured on the job, which prompted a series of long "safety meetings." This propmpted the manager to post signs throughout the plant that read:
Work Safely! Accidents cause Meetings!
Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
I remember reading that meetings are an ideal way to get some things done:
1)Pool expertise from different departments
2)"Gather" authority for cross-department tasks
3)Get feedback and progress reports from different departments
4)Discuss critical issues that require human interaction
5)Criticise new products and techniques from different points of view
6)Brainstorm
When used properly, meetings can be powerful tools... But the ONLY reason I see meetings being used anymore is POLITICS! To palm off responsibility, blame someone else, avoid work, act important, establish power ("I called a meeting because I can"), or just generally be a waste of organizational oxygen. No wonder people hate them... The last thing most techs and researchers want is to get mired in office politics.
A meeting conducted properly is a huge help. It can speed up things and make your goals and objectives a whole lot clearer than they ever were, but unfortunately some people just don't seem to get that.
StrayByte.Net
That's what "Too many" means...
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I use to have this at my old job that was posted. Some of the high-ups were not impressed.
Are you Lonely ?
Don't like working on your own ? Hate Making Decisions ?
Then Call a Meeting !!!!
YOU CAN...
SEE people
DRAW Flowcharts
FEEL Important
IMPRESS your collegues
FORM subcommittees
MAKE meaningless recommendations
All on Company Time
MEETINGS
The pratical alternative to work.
I know that most people here work on the "create the product" part of industry, or so it seems, but when you're like me, meetings are a wonderful thing.
I work in sales. The more that I can understand our products, the better of a salesman I can be. I"m not the type of person that will try to make up things because they want products to look good -- instead, I try to be as knowledgeable as I can, because from what I have seen, the more knowledgeable that the buyer sees that I am, the more trusting they are of me, and therefore more willing to buy what I am selling.
I don't spend a large amount of my time in meetings, but at least for me, the meetings that I am a part of, each bit of information that I receive on a product ends up selling at least another few units, so they're great for me.
ArtificialNews.com will one day SAVE YOUR LIFE from evil AI!
There is something disturbing about this paragraph from the article:
Rogelberg has delivered this insight in a talk called "Meetings and More Meetings," which he presented to a meeting at the University of Sheffield. He also does a talk called "Not Another Meeting!", which has been well received at two meetings in North Carolina.
when I have meetings with my phd supervisors I usually enjoy them a lot. if you're discussing something with funny, intelligent experts who help you get things done it's not surprising it's enjoying.
so don't blame meetings. I expect most meetings are bad for you just because most *people* are stupid, boring, selfish, ignorant, incompetent and more likely to get in your way than not.
Meeting are held for a reason
Most of the time, that reason is to make middle managers (whose job consists exclusively of writing memos and attending meetings) look busy. The more incapable the manager is of writing effectively and/or the more unwilling to have a record of exactly what they said, the more likely you are to have a full daily schedule of meetings.
Now watch as I reveal the one most evil and stupid word in modern business - communication. Not simply the actual fact of doing so, but the implication that communication solves all business problems, sort of like how everyone thought communication solved all marital problems back in the 80's when it was popular to say that. Communication is a load of horse shit. There is no such thing as a communication problem. Every "communication" problem in modern business is in fact a confidence problem. The information is readily available, but 2 things block its distribution: 1 - Managers don't like to go on record. They don't reply to e-mails, for example. They lack the confidence to go on record with whatever they want to say. Here's an idea - if you don't have the balls to put your "communication" on paper with your name on it for all to see, then STFU. If you lie frequently enough that committing anything to writing hampers your ability to work, then you need to be fired. 2 - For the reasons documented above, employees have no confidence in anything managers have to say. I've never seen anything cited as a communication problem that was not actually communicated in fact. "I guess we need better communication between you/your department and me/my department." has become the polite and meaningless mea culpa for the business age.
NO! We don't need more communication. We need to STFU and get back to work!
*ducks*
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
At this meeting was a very old and experienced PhD who knew everything about the project. He regarded the meeting as an opportunity to display his knowledge at length, but had nothing of substance to put forward; after all, it was his design decisions that had caused the mess in the first place. Did I mention he was now a contractor and paid by the hour?
I know nothing about the branch of engineering concerned but I did go and ask the technicians what they thought. They knew the answer perfectly well - the material of a major tubular component was completely underspecified and was leaking gas when the plant got hot. But the PhD refused to accept it.
We didn't exactly draw straws for who would bring it up - but suffice it to say that I ended up with the short one. The result was an hour or so of listening to the worst metallurgical bullshit I have ever endured. But in the end we got our way, the components were replaced, the system started to work, the PhD was let go, (and a year later I was the engineering manager - it seems the MD had been reading the minutes).
Proof if proof were needed that the real reason for meetings is to drive the engineers to the point at which they will risk their jobs and their credibility to find a solution that means they don't have to go to any more meetings.
Pining for the fjords
I've got a productive relationship with peers/partners/co-workers (and even some big-ticket customers) that, despite years of working together, I have never met in person. We make excellent use of (get this!) the telephone. I know, it's quaint.
But the most important thing is that we keep those calls short, and don't need to use them to convey basic information to each other because we do that all the time using e-mail, IM, and a rich portally-intranet-ish web presence.
But the only thing that really makes those supporting technologies a viable replacement for endless facetime is decent communications skills. Being able to cogently write what's on your mind, provide a usable spreadsheet or document that illuminates the matter at hand... even being able to use IM without it decaying into a meandering social tarpit.. those things require a little bit of practice and discipline. But they buy you productive, asynchronous communication that liberates you to work on your actual job on your own schedule.
In-person meetings are saved for when it really matters: gaining and keeping paying customers. Oh, and free food.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
1. Changing paradygms.
2. Drinking the kool aid at a meeting where business developers are present.
3. Falling for the "everyone please send HR a fresh copy of your resume to update your files" ploy
4. Trying to calm down a frantic coworker that is freaking out for a very minuscule thing without at least some caffeine courage.
5. Drinking the last cup in the coffee urn. I can promise you this: it will taste like boiled crap.
6. Eating that last donut from the meeting 3 days ago. The Krisky Kreme box has not moved from the coffee pot table and that one donut looks tempting as hell, but trust me: you don't want it.
7. Come-to-Jesus meetings for a project that is not yours.
8. Any brainstorming meeting involving your newly hired business developer, especially since you don't have a formal "business development" function.
9. Trying to explain to a frantic coworker that mail.app is not crazy and it is not ignoring rules.
10. Trying to explain the same coworker that classifying mail as "ham" helps the filter learn what makes a good email and avoids false positives.
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder
I work in the IT field (obviously) but I work freelance. Basically, I choose who I work for, so I don't get stuck working under/alongside/above people that I don't personally like. I naturally veer away from meetings. Most meetings I've ever had were a waste of time and they were paying me a phenomenal amount of money to sit and talk, or sometimes even just sit. I don't doubt that meetings can be useful, quite often I've been keen to be involved in ones that affected me directly but been refused (yes, I've actually been politically blocked from attending a meeting with a supplier that would affect my work directly and drastically as I would be in charge of running and maintaining whatever they supplied!).
I've had three hour meetings where the only conclusion and main focus of the chat was what colour green to place on a website background (the website, incidentally, never got off the ground). And they paid me for that time. Now, I don't mind doing stuff that people are paying me for so long as it's something that I can do (I wouldn't say I could fix something if I couldn't), however I try to avoid all meetings now with those same people because it degenerates into a waste of five or more people's time, money and effort, distracts them from the real work and doesn't actually achieve anything we couldn't do with a poll on a webpage. I could make money from sitting in a room and gabbing nonsense but I consider it a real waste of my own time and talent.
One of the reasons that I won't work 9-5, mon-fri, for someone I don't like is that I can call things what they are if people ask. I've never sucked up to a boss in my life because I've never had one. I've had clients, whom I visit initially to determine their needs and then work for, but I avoid "meetings" at all costs.
Meetings are generally without any sort of focus, any conclusions, any change of opinions. They usually are either explaining things that people don't need to understand ("the network is broke, we're fixing it, it'll take a day and cost us X amount of money" is a perfectly good explanation for someone who's not technically minded), letting people spread responsibility for difficult decisions (or even just a comfort blanket for those same decision-makers) and attempts at micro-managing things that those people just don't understand.
If you have a group of colleagues who are all working on very intertwined things, they will form their own meeting either 1-1 or in small groups. They'll have to, and they'll do it a damn sight better than you organising a meeting for them all to check up with you. If you are managing people whose job you could not do yourself, stay out of their way. Maybe find them once a month or so, just to check that everything's working and that you're aware of any major problems. You hire people into a job to do that job, not to make them spend hours in a meeting explaining things they learned twenty years ago to you because you know nothing about that area.
I find that nonsensical meetings only come about through management. Managed-meetings are rarely productive. Having said that, there is a difference between a meeting and a chat. Chat to your staff, make sure they are okay, make sure things are on track, congratulate them on a job well done but bow to their expertise. If you invite someone to a meeting, it's because they absolutely HAVE to be there. If you are having a meeting with a IT vendor and you couldn't tell the difference between two products without the salesman's help, you need your IT guy there, to tell you and the vendor exactly what you want and don't want. But then, why are you there in the first place if you don't know what you're buying?
Meetings can be so useful in the right hands, but 99% of the really important decisions are made or can be made when those self-same people pass each other in the corridor, or pop into each other's office/cubicle/cupboard to chat. That way, there's also no problem with disturbing each other from important work (they won't chat
Meetings = Bad.
Wasting time posting to Slashdot to complain about meetings = Good.
Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion. -- Ambrose Bierce
There is a difference between what is claimed in the subject Meetings are Bad For You and what is claimed in the article ... having too many meetings and spending too much time in meetings per day may have negative effects...
A well lead meeting, kept short and on the subject, can be extremely effective. These do not have to be meetings where you book a meetingroom and order sanwiches. This can be a standup-meeting at the coffeemachine for 5-10 minutes in the morning as well. It can be sitting together around one desk, comparing notes. It can be two people calling in a third one by one to handle things and thus not taking up the time of the other people that are NOT needed for sayd problem/discussion/whatever.
As strange as it sounds to some here, this will have a much better impact then sending a umpteenth email with ALERT! as subject and marked as high priority.
Some people do actually pay more attention to what others have to say, even if that person is saying exactly word for word what has been mailed to them.
As strange as it sounds, that is a given. This does not take away that meeting to schedule future meetings, so a dicussion can be held on a workgroup to form a thinktank to make a comite are good. At best they then become the equivalent of the watercooler gossip on management level (and they drink perrier).
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
One point to consider is the content of the meetings.
I've worked at several large and small companies over the past few years, as an employee and as a contractor. One thing I've found consistent is that meetings with contractors are concise and to the point because they are paying for the contractors time. Meetings with employees only seem to drag on.
Two things are needed for a meeting to actually be productive.
1. A good boss/moderator to KEEP THINGS ON TOPIC!
2. A good boss/moderator to KEEP THINGS ON TOPIC!
If the meeting is kept on topic it will go quickly and we can all get back to work knowing the bosses new/altered expectations.
If elemet one or two are missing we all get cranky and nothing gets done.
Funny, I always schedule mine for the length of time I need (15, 20, 30 min) before lunch. Makes people be breif.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump