Chapter 33

The ultimate management sin is wasting people's time.  It sounds like 
this should be an easy sin to avoid, but it isn't.  You have some 
needs of your own as a manager, and these needs may run squarely 
against your intention to preserve and use wisely the time of the 
people working under you.  

For Instance
------------

You call a meeting with your staff but arrive late yourself (you had 
to take an urgent call from your own boss), leaving the others to 
cool their heels.  You let yourself be called out of the meeting for 
a quick but important chat with the client, and the meeting loses 
focus without you.  Or, maybe the meeting itself is a waste of 
everyone's time (except possibly your own).  In our consulting work, 
we often find ourselves sitting in on meetings that, to all outward 
appearances, look like they are intended to accomplish some work 
purpose, but which may really be intended for something else 
entirely:

     The meeting started out with a few minutes of easy banter, a 
     lighthearted comment addressed to each one of those present by 
     Ambrose, the boss.  Each recipient rose to the bait and offered and 
     equally lighthearted riposte, all in good fun.  Then there was a 
     sharp change of mood as Ambrose took control.  Issues were set out on 
     the table and addressed, briefly and *very* efficiently.  Each issue 
     was discussed with one of the participants.  There was a short 
     dialogue between Ambrose and that person, a transfer of status 
     information so that Ambrose would know exactly what progress had been 
     made that week.  During the meeting, the time was about equally 
     focused on each of the participants, each interacting separately with 
     the boss while the others listened in, silently.  During Elaine's 
     moment in the sun, I could see that Roger was distracted, obviously 
     planning what he would say when Ambrose turned to him.  At the end of 
     the meeting, Ambrose established action items, more or less one per 
     person.  What could possibly be wrong with this oh so familiar 
     picture?  What's wrong to my mind is that this is not a meeting at 
     all; it's a ceremony.

                                                                  -TDM

When you convoke a meeting with N people present, the normal 
presumption is that all those in the room are there because they need 
to interact with each other in order to come to certain conclusions.  
When, instead, the participants take turns interaction with one key 
figure, the expected rationale for assembling the whole group is 
missing; the boss might just as well have interacted separately with 
each of the subordinates without obliging the others to listen in.  

    We said at the beginning that it was your need - the boss's need - 
that was being served, perhaps at the expense of some of the 
subordinates' time.  But isn't this okay?  Isn't this what bosses 
have to do in order to keep control?  Isn't this a legitimate cost of 
managing and coordinating complex efforts?  Yes and no.  The meeting 
wasn't really necessary to convey status;  there are many less ways 
to do that.   The need that was being served was not the boss's need 
for information, but for the reassurance.  The ceremony supplies 
reassurance.   It establishes for everyone, that the boss is boss, 
that he or she gets to run the meeting, that attendance is expected, 
that the hierarchy is being respected.


Status Meetings are about Status
--------------------------------

A real working meeting is called when there is a real reason for all the 
people invited to think through some matter together.  The purpose of the 
meeting is to reach consensus. Such a meeting is, almost by definition an 
ad hoc affair.  Ad hoc implies that the meeting is unlikely to be 
regularly scheduled.  Any regular get together is therefore somewhat 
suspect as likely to have a ceremonial purpose rather than a focused goal 
of consensus.  The weekly status meeting is an obvious example.  Though 
its goal may seem to be status reporting, its real intent is status 
confirming.  And it's not the status of the work, but the status of the 
boss.

    Organizations have need of ceremony.  It's perfectly reasonable to call 
a meeting with a purpose that is strictly ceremonial particularly at project 
milestones, when new people come on board, or for celebrating good work by 
the group.  Such meetings do not waste anyone's time.  They fulfill real 
needs for appreciation.  They confirm group membership - its importance 
and its value.  Ceremonial meetings that only celebrate the bossness of 
the boss, however, are a waste.

    When bosses are particularly needy, the burden of ceremonial status 
meetings can grow almost without bound.  We know of one organization, for 
example, where daily two hour status meetings are the norm.  When 
participants are off site during a meeting, they are expected to call in 
and participate by speakerphone for the whole duration.  Nonattendance is 
reacted to as a threat and is subject to serious penalties.