Management Perspectives

Much has been written and spoken about meetings—uncharitable remarks like waste of time, waste of money, boring, airing frustration are made. So much so, that a recent Harvard Business Review article was titled, ‘Stop the Meeting Madness’.

Most of the published literature has focused on why meetings fail or succeed, scheduling meetings efficiently, planning for a successful committee meeting, etc. Emphasis is now on how to make the best of a meeting. Sufficient focus is not espoused on the leadership dimension, a key aspect for effectiveness, which this article aims at.

Committee meetings are normally desired to discuss specific organisational issues that require wider discussions and problem solving.

Frailties of meetings
1.Committee formation, at times, is not a well thought out plan. A bias for inclusion/ exclusion occurs.
2.Many committees fail to ensure contribution of all members.
3.Team of equals not created is visible in seating arrangement; attention to questions missed, etc.
4.Chairperson (Chair) arrives late which encourages members.
5.The authoritarian style of some Chairs has serious implications.
6.Members find bureaucratic meetings boring. 7.Often, there is no focused discussion.
8.Due to hidden agenda of some, many members cannot come out with their ingenuity.
Therefore, the role of the chairperson and his/ her credibility is critical to the success of a meeting,

Roles of a chairperson
Chairperson leads the committee for a task. A committee is formed for a temporary, but important assignment. The right people need to be included, which means only a diverse mix of talent—who would suit better to the subject/ objective(s) and one member with research background or aptitude if research is likely to add value.

An incident is cited here to show how subjectivity enters in the selection of members. The HRD department that I headed had proposed a performance management system for which extensive research and discussions had been done. I was asked to propose by the executive director certain senior executives to form a committee. I was also indicated names of one deputy general manager and a general manager for inclusion. I had interviewed those two for the project. In my opinion, they would care less for research and had negative and fixed views. I was in a dilemma. Had I proposed those names, most probably, the proposal would not have obtained a favourable recommendation. And had I skipped those names, I would have disobeyed, and the proposal would probably have gone into the cold storage. After thinking a lot, an idea occurred: accommodate the two and for the remaining, propose relatively young, positive, and development oriented minds. I hoped the latter would prevail. The recommended names were accepted. No formal chairperson was fixed.

The members, after some time, started attaching each other’s ideas and arguing outside the subject. After about 45 minutes, the discussions were heated, as if they were rivals. I expressed that the discussions were slipping. No effect. Later, again, I stressed that time was running out.

After lunch break, the tension broke, and there was sufficient focus. The HRD proposal got through with some minor changes and suggestions to include. But I had played a tactical strategy and forgot my personal values doing so. However, balancing selection helped competitive discussions too.

Wrong selection may involve loss of focus in discussions and dilution of the professional orientation and content. Being thoughtfully selective about the right members is critical.

Encouraging the talented as willing participants

Highly talented executives like to avoid inclusion for varied reasons. When I was MD, I discussed with a senior vice president that I was nominating him to a committee. The assignment was to undertake a study of the customer requirement and design a scheme focused to customer-needs. He had lot to argue and said, “I don’t want to go. There are others.” I opened discussion again, the next day. I finally explained, “Look, designing a customer scheme is a creative work. All cannot fill the slot. You are the right person. Your own hidden talent will come to the fore and advance further and you will carry the memory career long.” This is how he was mentally prepared to agree. It is necessary to make the executive a willing member than just to pass orders to join the committee. This is the job of the manager. In view of the above, the CEOs of the companies need to communicate with all heads the rules for selection and helping him/ her to be willing and effective participants in the committee.

Developing a winning team

The chair provides the necessary drive and momentum to the members to keep moving. Though a temporary entity, the task requires a dedicated team. It is for the chair to help the group become a team and a winning team. He/she explains the goal(s) which the committee is required to achieve. Members would have concerns and issues and answering to their satisfaction that the members start to think of the goals as their own goals. On the way there might be conflict between the members which the chair needs to settle. Apart from owning the goals they begin supporting, cooperating as the behavioural sciences guru, Dr. Udai Pareek, explains while summarising team theories, particularly of Bennis and Shephered and Bruce Tuckman. The chair also needs to ensure that no one is marginalised or discriminated against.

Collective problem-solving and decisionmaking strategy

It is expected that the committee’s performance for the assignment produces the expected results. Collective effort under leadership of the chair is another strategy. The chair focuses on the objective(s) of the assignment, team objectives like cohesiveness, making diagnosis and reaching solutions. One interesting case, though not strictly as a committee is defined, relates to one hour daily meeting. Dr. Anil K Khandelwal, ex-Chairman and Managing Director, Bank of Baroda organised meetings with top management as an important lever of change. In these meetings, setting apart from a compelling vision of technology led business transformation, the top team reviewed its legacy problems including internal bureaucracy, response patterns, business climate, issues of customer centricity, and employee engagement. According to Khandelwal, morning meetings played a significant role in aligning the management to a shared vision and a futuristic agenda and achieve a multi-faceted progress including the doubling of business in just three years. Khandelwal’s strategy of daily morning meets makes it evident that collective problem-solving and decision-making is a creative process to achieve multiple goals for better results. The chair’s focus, likewise, on collectiveness will lead to better results.

Be transparent than double talking

A good leader is a clean person than a double talker. He/she helps, rather than misleads. However, on the ground, at times, it is the opposite. Award-winning, best-selling author, listed in ‘100 business coaches’, Richie Norton mentioned, “Old guards will tell you to innovate and be creative, but won’t mention that it’s only ok as long as it’s something they’ve already thought of and agree with.” Clearly it is a double game. Faced with double game, members would be confused and the outcome, ineffective. The hidden agenda may increase problems: members losing confidence in leadership and their initiative and morale will decline. Denying transparency is denying free expression and the right to deliberate. The chair must commit to transparent dealings than double talk.

Be like a leader; not a boss
A Facebook video in which the chair is sitting on one side and seven to eight members are sitting facing him in rows goes as follows:
The boss shouts, “You stupid fellows, I am the boss. Do, what I say.”
One member firmly states, “Yes, you are the boss.”
The boss retorts, “What do you mean?”
The guy gets up, “You are the boss,” and walks up to him and hands over his resignation.
The boss, “Why are you resigning?” The guy, “So as to tell you the difference between boss and leader.”
In this case, the boss assumes himself to be great but the member feels otherwise. He resigns, while each of the rest seems to think, “Why am I here?”
A leader has ideals like compassion and helping attitudes; the boss may be commanding and abuse his power. A leader shares his powers. He knows executives work for their dreams; not for transactions.
Chairs must try and learn to be like leaders.

Listening and encouraging for focused discussion
There are leaders who are too eager to talk too much. Microsoft CEO, Satya Nadela’s advice for better meetings, “Listen more, talk less, and be decisive when time comes.”

Focused discussion is the backbone of a committee. They say quality emerges from a mass of information. Therefore, the chair needs to encourage all members’ participation. And if one tries to dominate discussions, the controls has to him/her.

Chair needs to learn that silent, hesitant, introvert’s participation can be creative; the genius, intellectual needs special attention. This role is neglected by several chairpersons. Experience suggests that positive attitude of the chair combined with simple questions which maintain the interest of members, matters. Leading well, therefore, requires the chair to talk less, listen more, encouraging all to contribute and improve the standard and focus of discussions.

In conclusion

The above discussion is around the process issues involved in leading a committee. The chairperson needs to reflect and exhibit his/her image like that of a leader who is democratic, believer in human values, and has motivational strategies so that members remain excited and focused and are keen to contribute. She/he encourages diverse views, poses small questions, complimenting and supporting the members, and reinforces good dialogues to help them sustain their interest and continuous thinking.

Lest it gives a wrong impression, I clarify that there have been well-run committees with good successes. They can be emulated. I also suggest that appropriate orientation or counseling programmes in leadership with focus on meetings for likely chairpersons be arranged.