Ве prepared before тне meeting

 

The general purpose of the meeting needs to be broken down into mоre tangible aims –directional but open-ended - and more specific objectives or targets. Once more the principle of Be Prepared comes into play as you begin to think ahead and plan the meeting in more detail. For careful preparation is the secret of success.

The agenda is а key factor. It shouldn't be just а list of headings to jog your memory during а meeting. Draw it up with thought, indicating whether an item is for discus­sion or decision. Briefly describe the matter or subject.

'Mounting costs', for example, looks too brief and vague, whereas 'Mounting costs: to discuss the report on energy conservation in the factory and make decisions on the first and third recommendations is much more definite. It gives people the opportunity to think about the matter beforehand. Ensure that everyone receives the agenda and relevant papers - in this case the energy conservation report - at least five clear days before the meeting.

People take in information more readily through their eyes than their ears - hence the Chinese proverb 'А picture is worth а thousand words'. Visual aids should therefore play а part in your meetings more often than not: if they are clear, simple and vivid they can save you time.

 

Exercise: Be Prepared

Identify the next three formal meetings which you will chair. Jot them down on а piece of paper and label them А, В and С. Do you intend to make use of any of the following:

 

	A	B	C
§ Overheard projector
§ Slides
§ Prepared flipcharts
§ Unprepared flipcharting
§ Reports
§ Financial statements
§ A written agenda
§ Models
§ Minutes
§ A different room layout

 

Time spent on preparation is seldom wasted. If yougo into а meeting clear about the objectives, having thought about the subject in advance and with everything ready, it is already most probable that your meeting will be effective.

 

CHECKLIST: PREPARING FOR DISCUSSION

Yes No

Are you clear about the purpose of this planned discussion?

 

Do the other participants know that purpose?

 

If not, do you plan to communicate it to them before the

meeting?

 

Have you circulated any necessary information well before

the meeting?

 

Have you identified the main topics to be discussed? In

each objective clear?

 

Have you framed some questions to stimulate discussion?

Have you prepared a timetable for the meeting?

Is the accommodation and seating plan arranged?

 

Are all necessary materials, including visual aids and

flipcharts, ready?

 

 

GUIDING ТНЕ DISCUSSION

As а chairman yourself it is useful to bear in mind that you have two principal functions within your role. Being chairman in the narrow sense means you are accountable for seeing that procedures are adhered to and that participants both behave themselves and contribute as effectively as possible to the business in hand. You are there to see fair play, to ensure that everyone has their turn and to apply the appropriate rules, not unlike а referee. The foreman of а jury is а chairman in this specific sense.

Second, you may be the group's leader or manager as well, charged with achieving specified results. The nature of those outcomes will necessarily vary according to the type of meeting. In creative-thinking meetings, for example, the leader's role may be more that of а catalyst than traffic controller.

There can be some obvious tensions between the 'referee' and 'leader' roles. Some groups and leaders indeed seek to avoid them by appointing а referee-type chairman, like the Speaker in the House of Commons, leaving leaders free to argue their case in the meeting without having to preside over it. Other chairmen signal when they are changing hats by 'stepping down from the chair' for а particular item on the agenda.

In most situations it makes sense for the chairman to exercise both functions. There is some overlap between the roles anyway. Let us assume here that you are doing both.

Some of the key leadership functions, such as defining the task and planning, have been discussed above. But as chair­man you should remember to begin the meeting by saying what the purpose is and why it is necessary. Do not assume that everyone knows. You may also want to check that the participants are comfortable with the agenda, so that your plan for the meeting now becomes our plan for it. In а pleasant but firm way, show that you have taken charge.

Once work has started on the agenda you will have to exercise the function of controlling, which should be done with intelligence and sensitivity. What would you do about an over-talkative person? It is essential to stop him but it has to be done tactfully as well as firmly: 'Thank you, Michael, I think we have got thedrift of your argument. Susan, you haven't said anything yet. Do you agree with Michael or not?'

Experienced colleagues at а discussion meeting will seldom require you to exercise this gate-keeping function of 'opening the door' for someone to make а contribution beyond listening intently. More often than not, your energies will be deployed in shutting the door! But as а leader you should always be aware of who hasn't contrib­uted, and if you think that diffidence, or lack of assertiveness to jump into the busy pool is the reason, you can at least offer an opportunity for speaking.

If a long-winded person still challenges you for the right of way - by continuing to talk over others or by interrupt­ing again - then you will have to show more steel until the message is taken. Never lose control.

Heading off potential or actual irrelevancies is also а vital part of controlling а meeting. Sometimes a red herring looks more tasty than the bread-and-butter items on the agenda. Where the object of а meeting is creative thinking, as in brainstorming sessions it is often worth pursuing red herrings, for the apparently irrelevant may disguise the germ of а new idea.

The problems of controlling or guiding а discussion are heightened by the fact that it is in the nature ofthe beast to ramble and become discursive. As the mode1 below suggests, the comp1ex pattern of1ines ofcommunication available in а group situation (as opposed to а one-to-one interview) makes control that much more difficult. Some formal groups, in the parliamentary tradition, try to solve that potential difficulty by making it а ru1e that all remarks should be made to and through the chairman. That may work in more formal debate, especially if it involves а large number of people, but it is antithetica1 to the more informa1 and group-centred nature of discussion.

 

 

 

То exercise these leadership functions and to contribute to the discussion, you will need to develop yourself by becoming:

§ а clear and rapid thinker

§ an attentive listener

§ able toexpress yourself clearly and succinctly

§ ready toclarify views badly expressed

§ able tobe impartial and impersonal

§ а preventer ofinappropriate interruptions

§ patient, tolerant and kind

§ friendly but brisk and businesslike

 

One important way of guiding the discussion is to summar­ize progress so far, so that the remaining agenda or issues stand out clear1y. Thus а summary given during а meeting (rather than in conclusion) can act as а trumpet sounding the recall. But the summary has to be accurate. With all their other responsibilities it requires а high level ofnatural ability and practice for leaders to be able to summarize succinctly at the right time, in such а way that the summary is instantly accepted as а true account ofthe proceedings to date.

Although summarizing is an especially important skill for а chairman, all listeners can find it useful onoccasions. А summary is а sign oflistening because it establishes whether or not you can select the salient points to the satisfaction of the speaker and the rest ofthe audience, if there is one. А summary not only chops away much ofthe dead wood and foliage, but it a1so provides а listening check, for other listeners will either accept your abbrevi­ation or reject it. Thus а summary helps the process ofthought and digestion.

The singer, however, takes а piano note and transforms it into а vocal sound. Another chairmanship asset is the distinctive1y human ability to interpret from one language into another, without loss offide1ity to the original. The interpreter must be able to divine meaning and translate it into а different language. For example, the contribu­tion of а technical specialist may have to be translated into language simple enough to be understood with reasonable effort around the table. Your ability to do so will test your powers as а listener. But such а timely interpret­ation can contribute to the overall direction of the discussion.

Your manner may do as much if not more than your words to encourage (or discourage) genuine communi­cation. Humor, modesty and firmness have their own part to play. As the leader's own task encompasses the creation of а warm, friendly but businesslike atmosphere, it is vital that you should check whether or not your manner aids and abets in promoting good communication. In the right time and place, ask for feedback on this score.

If someone is asked to take action as а result of discussion on an item, the chairman should check that the participant understands and accepts that action. Steps or actions thus agreed should normally carry а completion time.

The questions as to whether а committee - а decision-making or problem-solving group - can be executive, i.e. can do аnуthing on its own - is really trivial. Literally as а body it can no more do аnуthing than а football team can score а goal. In each case there must be an individual agent, but it is the group which makes it possible for the individual to асt. Although its decision will in most cases be carried out by one of its members, or its officers, in а real sense the action is the action of the committee. The important decision has been made by the committee, or is а consequence of its deliberations.

ТНЕ EFFECTIVE CHAIRMAN

The Prime Minister shouldn't speak too much himself in Cabinet. Не should start the show or ask somebody else to do so, and then intervene only to bring out the more modest chops who, despite their seniority, might say nothing if not asked. And the Prime Minister must sum up… Particularly when a non-Cabinet minister is asked to attend, especially if it is his first time, the Prime Minister may have to be cruel. The visitor may want to show how good he is, and go on too long. А good thing is to take no chance and ask him to send the Cabinet а paper in advance… If somebody else looks like making a speech, it is sound to nip in with, 'Are you objecting? You’re not? Right. Next business' and the Cabinet can move on leaving in its wake trail of clear, crisp uncompromising decisions. That is what government is about. And the challenge to democracy is to get it done quickly

Clement Attlee

 

 

Remember that discussion is а slow process. It is inappro­priate when quick action is required. Nor has it much value in problem solving if group members lack relevant knowl­edge or information. Moreover, the informality inherent in discussion means that it is no substitute for а comprehensive statement of all the issues or а sustained presentation of an argument. Lastly, the prospect of discussion seldom encour­ages thorough or meticulous preparation compared to, say, if you were asked to give а presentation. The results may be poor-quality thinking and inadequate decisions.

These limitations of discussion should not be made into an excuse to dispense with it or to cut it down to the bare minimum. Leadership can hardly be democratic if there is no discussion. They only emphasize the necessity for its intelligent use, on the right kinds of topics and problems, after adequate planning, and under optimum conditions of leadership and teamwork.

 

 

START ON TIME

 

Aim OUTLINE PURPOSE CLEARLY

State problem/ situation/ reason

Define constraints and limitations

Establish task(s) of meetings

 

Plan РРЕРАРЕ ТНЕ AGENDA

Draw up the agenda

Make sure that items on it are prioritized

And allocated sufficient time

 

Guide ENSURE EFFECТIVE DISCUSSION

Introduce topic(s) for discussion

Draw out opinions, viewpoints and

experiences

Develop group interest and involvement

Keep discussion within stated task(s)

Use time constraints to maintain relevance

Crystallize ESTABLISH CONCLUSIONS

Recognize degrees of feeling and changes

of opinion

Summarize points of agreement and

disagreement

State intermediate conclusions as they are

reached

Check understanding and acceptance

 

Act GAIN ACCEPTANCE AND СОММIТМЕNТ

Summarize and state conclusion(s) clearly

Gain commitment to action plan

State responsibility for action

Make sure that everybody understands

END ON TIME

 

Good chairmanship is vital for effective meetings. The chairman's task will sometimes pose problems, but а good chairman can make sure that а meeting is punctual, covers the ground, keeps moving forward and makes the appropri­ate decisions. Beneath that process lies purposeful communication.

 

UNDERSTANDING GROUPS

There are forces or factors in all groups which can affect the free exchange of information and meaning for better or worse. As а leader of discussion you need to be aware of them.

All working groups have three areas of need in соmmоn: the need to achieve their соmmоn task, the need to maintain themselves as а working unity, and the needs of individual members. Although it is composed of individuals, а group soon develops а 'group personality'.

As а leader you should always balance what groups have in соmmоn with what makes them unique and irreplace­able. The former allows you to prepare for your role, knowing what functions will be required. The latter reminds you that every group, every meeting, every discus­sion is always different. Youcan never jump into the same river twice.

The following list focuses on the group personality facet ofthe coin. It is designed to help you to consider any specialfeatures which may influence the way you manage com­munication in group situations. Remember that these factors develop only after а group has been together for some time.

 

§ Group conformity Most of us tend to behave in ways that will gain recognition, admiration, respect or approval from the groups to which we belong. Through trial and error we have learnt that ifwe conform со accepted standards our group relationships аrе happier. Thus our beliefs and actions are often influenced more by group opinion than by expert opinion. This is not а rule without exceptions, but it is common enough to be а significant characteristic ofgroup personality. The degree of conformity determines how free members feel со express their own ideas, and how much these ideas are appreciated by others.

§ Group values. Any group is likely со endorse and maintain values, or ideals, which differentiate it from others. An analysis ofthese values will aid in understanding а group's personality. It may also explain the aggressiveness one group displays towards others. And such an analysis ofgroup values will provide а basis for predicting the programmes, activities and actions а group is likely to support.

§ Group attitude to change Social changes within or among groups seldom win complete and immediate acceptance. Thus the degree to which а group resists change, either within the group or in its relations with others, is an important index ofthe group personality. Equally characteristic may be the group's standard methodsforeffecting change, whether by dictation of the leader, consensus, or some 'middle way'.

§ Group prejudice Few of uswillingly admit to holding prejudices which make usintolerant of other people's sex, rасе, religion, nationality, or social status. But we do know that other people are often prejudiced! In groups of like-­minded people prejudice is often clearly evident. In fact the prejudice of individuals may be intensified when they are within their group, and apparent even when they are apart from their fellows.

§ Group power Groups as wholes are always stronger than the sum oftheir individual parts. The social force offeeling and opinion is so powerful that people can fall sick and dieifthey are ostracized by their fellows. Indeed, in primitive societies to turn your face away from someone is а severe punishment. For we need people who will 'countenance’ us, or turn а friendly face towards us. In groups we remain aware of these primeval forces in our depth minds: hence the shades ofour reactive feelings, which range fromshyness through to а proper respect for the power ofthe community. For this reason individuals may find it difficult to speak their minds in groups. The leader, who has а certain counter-balancing power vis-à-vis the group, can support the individual in а variety ofways, but first you need to sense the balance ofpower between the group as а whole and each individual.

 

All the characteristics ofgroup personality listed above will influence the method and effectiveness ofgroup discussion. Suppose, forexample, that а group has а high regard formajority rule, is accustomed to formal meetings and enforces strict par1iamentary ru1es, makes 1itt1e resistance to change, encourages members with differing opinions to speak free1y and has few strong prejudices. For such а group, one might be able to predict with considerable accuracy the patterns of discussion most likely to be followed, and to estimate their probable effectiveness.

You also need to know how decisions are taken. In some groups decisions are made by one individua1. In more democratic groups decisions are made by enumeration, count­ing votes after adequate discussion. In others, decisions represent а coтpromise between proponents and opponents of а course of action in which members yie1d part of their views to reach а decision. In а very rea1 sense, а democracy is government by compromise. Under the most favourable conditions, groups may reach decisions by соnsеnsиs, а synthesis of the views of all group members. These favour­able conditions seldom exist if а group feels outside pressure, works under а state of tension or to meet а deadline.

An important skill in this context is testing for commitment. Not all decisions should be made by consensus, or even by majority vote, but in а democratic society many shou1d be. Moreover, the closer а group comes to consensus the more its members will tend to fee1 involved, committed or responsible for the outcome. Consensus, incidentally, does not mean tota1 100 per cent agreement on the part of each individua1. Rather, consensus stands for the decision which everyone will accept and go along with as the best in the circumstances. In physiology it means the general accord of different organs of the body in effecting а given purpose.

Some leaders possess а natura1 awareness of the consentive feeling in а group; others develop it over а lifetime. Of course, knowing where the consensus lies does not necess­arily mean that the leader accepts the group direction. Не may seek to change, or influence it, or - in the last resort ­tender his resignation. But whatever his ultimate response, it is а good start for him if he can sense the invisible consensus. Groups, like moving shoa1s of fish, have an unseen centre point; а constant1y shifting pole which draws the fish together as if by magnetic influence. Consensus in human groups is а similar centre of feelings. No leader can afford to be so oblivious to this point or so far ahead of it that all contact is lost.

Thus, 1ike Moses, the leader has to know when and where to strike the water of consensus from the rock of outward appearance. It is not always evident where the water lies, and the leader of any meeting should be able to test for consensus. Like water-divining, this is an inexact science. It is made up of simu1taneously asking for people's views while watching their faces and expressions. Views may be elicited either by direct questions, or else putting forward а tria1 consensus and judging the reactions. In this case testing for consensus is akin to summary.

What has to be avoided is making mistaken assumptions about group consensus, based on а misinterpretation of one or two nods or smiles, а few murmurs of approva1 or the outpourings of а vo1uble se1f-appointed spokesman. When leaders seize upon such straws they either revea1 their incompetence or (even worse) their own wishfu1 thinking about the result. Worst of all, it may look as if they are seeking to impose their own will by underhand methods.

The process of finding consensus is fraught with hazards, especially if some sort of consentive action is desperately needed. In particular the leader may have to guard against unfair pressures being brought to bear on individtla1s. 'Wе do all agree, don't we, Michae1…?' As the clock warns that the end of the meeting is nigh, it is common for waves of hostile or angry feelings, separated by troughs of honeyed smiles, to wash against the opposition in а last attempt to wear it away. Like the false prophets, such groups show themselves anxious 'to cry peaсе, peaсе, where there is no peaсе'.

In the absence of consensus groups usually have alterna­tive systems for making up their minds. The most common of these is voting. Depending on the rules, а vote may bе carried either by а simple majority, even if it is only one, or else а predetermined proportion, e.g. two-thirds, or even 75 per cent. This method is said to have the disadvantage that it leaves an unconvinced minority. But this is mitigated where the minority, having had their say, are willing to go along with the majority decision and do their best to make it work. Where they will not, the leader has to balance the disruption of the group against the gains stemming fromthe majority decision. Such conflicts between the values of unity and harmony on the one hand, and the onward call to advance on the other hand, can cause team leaders many thoughtful hours, and there are no easy answers.

The analysis of any group is not а simple matter. Groups are complex in make up and intricate in procedures. But if ­you are to function effectively - either as leader or partici­pant - it helps if you recognize and understand the personality characteristics of your group as well as the three areas of overlapping need.

 

 

 

ASSIGNMENTS

 

1) Highlight the following words and expressions in the chapter and check their meaning in the dictionary, paying attention to their stylistic peculiarities.

 

- to proliferate – proliferation – prolific

- futile – futility

- gear – to change gear – in full gear etc.

- to pool information

- tangible – intangible – tangibility

- open-ended

- agenda

- flipchart

- minutes

- to overlap

- diffident (about) – diffidence

- longwinded (of a person, speech, peace of writing etc)

- a red herring

- bread-and-butter (adj)

- to brainstorm – brainstorming

- to ramble

- discursive – discursiveness

- antithesis – antithetic(al)

- succinct

- salient (features, points)

- to aid and abet (law)

- to deliberate – deliberate (adj) – deliberative – deliberation

- in the wake

- meticulous – meticulousness

- to dispense (with)

- consensus (usually sing)

- to be fraught with

 

2) Dwell on the following issues:

- What five ingredients need to be present for the discussion to be effective?

- Specify the difference between the following terms:

a) a committee vs. a conference

b) a leader vs. a chairman

- What is meant nowadays by the term “political correctness”? Adduce your examples.

- What are the purposes of a discussion.? Could you add some to the given list?

- What are the characteristics of an efficient leader?

- Discuss the notion “group personality”. Comment on its significant characteristics.

- Expand on the phrase: “ A democracy is government by compromise”.

 

3) Task: By way of summary of the material create 10 commandments for managing communication in groups.

 

 

CHAPTER XII