meetings
Chairing when you also need to contribute to agenda items is tough.
Concentrating on your own contribution, rather than being in charge, makes for a much less painful and more productive meeting….
When it’s vital, political, complicated or emotionally-charged, having someone external and objective makes it more orderly, less awkward and with meaningful outputs!
“Having an external presence took the pressure off and allowed us to speak more freely”
An external facilitator’s job is:
Safely steering the conversation
Stopping people speaking over others
Asking tough questions
Keeping to time
Preventing tension over the contentious
Making sure objectives are met
Warding off time-wasting
Encouraging hearing all the voices
Save hours of skirting around issues or revisiting the same debates: Having a neutral, prepared, assertive and experienced chair can make meetings more than just manageable, by maximising the talents around the table.
CLIENT stories:
the board and senior leadership at cross purposes:
The 5-strong Senior Leadership Team found the 8 Board members constantly changing expectations or making it difficult to execute strategic direction.
By having a neutral person guiding quarterly and sub-board meetings, both parties took time to understand the workings and needs of the other.
The dynamic became more relaxed within 6 months, and The Board reported feeling more valuable and involved. The Senior Leadership Team and their senior managers reported feeling more appreciated and respected.
The parties fed back how they felt part of a solid wider team and how the work pace had picked up, with clear dialogue, far fewer blocks, plus ways to overcome hurdles.
A cross-departmental project Team struggled to work together:
The team comprised specialists from one creative and one analytical function. It suffered a lack of cooperation, when actions seemed to have been agreed in meetings but not executed.
With an intervening neutral facilitator they first confided their concerns and aspirations. Then careful, constructive and exploratory conversations unfolded across two meetings.
The team widened understanding of each others’ motivations, skillsets, breadth of experience and fears and limitations.
A fresh energy, a united perspective and a sense of ambition evolved. The team began to perform within weeks and surpass original targets.
a new management structure unsettled middle managers:
A change in company ownership led to a restructure which altered most of the processes the 17-strong middle management had followed.
The 6 senior managers were less affected or already familiar with the new ways of working, but the majority of the workforce felt the effects.
Working with all 23, in three meetings across one month, key issues were identified and solutions suggested.
They created a plan of compromises and new ideas which met the needs of both groups. By the end of the quarter, most of the disruptions had stopped and progress was made faster than expected.