The reality of corporate life is that most meetings fall somewhere between “this is a waste of time” and “we could have easily done this over email.” And yet, if there is an important meeting and you’re not invited, you get very mad and demand to be invited. Then you get there and you’re like, This sucks. Why am I here?
14 comments:
I think this article was pretty funny but also informative. I often have trouble speaking up a lot in class and during meetings so this gave some really useful tips. You do not have to be the smartest person or the most interested person in the meeting to look like you are really engaged and are actually contributing to the meeting. This article was all about fooling everyone around you by confusing them a little. If you say something that sounds smart, but it does not really mean anything or forward the conversation, people may not notice if it sounds good. I really liked how she said to open and close a conference call because it seems like you are a vital part of that meeting by being the manager and keeping everyone on track, but they would do fine without you. It tricks people into thinking that you spoke during the meeting because they remember you taking control and organizing it.
Wow. I was not expecting that when I opened the article. And thinking back, I guess it made sense because my first thought when I saw the headline was “Okay, what do we have here? A few tips and tricks for people to listen to me more or certain thing to do when speaking that will make my point absolutely clear?” However, I saw this article as more of a comment on business culture. And most importantly, it wasn’t that off. There are a few practical take-aways though. Although not deeply addressed, the list hits on conference calls and the issues that come with them. Multiple times this summer, I was responsible for setting up the conference call and sending information on how to dial in, etc. There was always some awkwardness in the room waiting for the delay to kick in and hear what they were saying on the other end. Ultimately, you need to hear the other designers have to say in a production meeting, however I hope in the near future there will be a better solution than a conference call.
When I first started reading this article, I felt like it seemed oddly manipulative, and after the first piece of advice I was thinking, “that is terrible advice” and then I realized the whole article is satire, at which point I found it quite funny. I quite liked point three (nothing says smart like “We need to make a good decision here”) and point nine (who doesn’t like a meeting to reduce to number of meetings?). This article does actually provide a very good guide of what not to do in meetings. I think the fundamental problem that is being poked fun at here is the idea of looking at meetings as a tool for personal gain. Each person’s goal in a meeting should not be looking smart, their goal should be to effectively contribute to the discussion in order to fulfill the purpose of the meeting. That being said, I’m sure that there are plenty of people who feel like they need to use meetings as a chance to look good, and often that could lead to them doing some of the things on this list, which are at best annoying and at worst going to actual impede the progress of the meeting.
At first, I could not tell that the article was satire, and while I incredulously thought that everything being described was a bad idea, I finally realized it was not an actual suggestion around “Open a Conference Call”. That being said, it is a very humorous once you know they are not serious. Prior to that, I was furious because as someone who leads a lot of meetings, all of these activities are disruptive and counterproductive. Part of what we learn about meeting etiquette at CMU is how to hit the sweet spot between a meeting being too short and not having enough content and having enough to talk about that it actually is a useful meeting to have. Interjections for the sake of interjecting are not welcome! In the end, the article does point to something inherently important about meetings that a lot of people fail to realize: meetings are not about the individual; they are about the project and the topic at hand. If all people in the meeting provide helpful information about agenda items and work toward solutions or simply observe if they have nothing to contribute, their presence is know, acknowledged, and important. No gimmicks necessary.
I, too, at first thought that this article was actually serious about the advice it was giving, but then I realized it was satire and it’s actually great. It points out everything dumb that people do in meetings like repeating a point that was just said or finding excuses to talk. In a real meeting that would be incredibly annoying, especially if you were trying to lead it. By the tips in this article you can avoid disrupting the meeting from the real goal and focus on getting the task at hand done. Meetings are never about the individual person. If they were they would be one on one. In a meeting your job becomes how best can you contribute and move the conversation forward to achieve the goal that was laid out at the beginning. And if the meeting is to inform you about something, the chances are greater that you are meant to simply listen and not talk. Contributing for contribution sake will just mean you're going to have to have more meetings because nothing was accomplished. Like they mentioned in the brainstorming tip.
This article was great! In addition to being satirical and entertaining, it was thought provoking as well. It really does raise the question of why meetings are so ingrained in corporate culture, and the lengths some people go to to make themselves look smart. I feel like the “tips” that are mentioned in the article are well known indicators of someone not paying attention in a meeting. Many of them are pretty outrageous (which is what clued me in that this article is, in fact, a satire).I think that no matter how much you are dreading a meeting or how boring you think it is, you should still pay attention and try and make a meaningful contribution.I definitely feel like this article made a great point about what not to do at meetings, and made it interesting read at the same time.
I really enjoyed this article! A big reason for that was because the author had such a great sense of humor, and pointed out the irony of hating meetings, but also wanting to be included. I feel as though these tips are more inside jokes as opposed to legitimate advice. None the less, The article makes some good points, although this dose not apply to me that often as I do not plan to go into any corporate work. When I first opened the link, I thought it would be a serious tip list, but it is enjoyable quite satirical.
At first, I thought this article was serious and I thought it was the dumbest thing I had ever read. I was fully prepared to write out a great 150 to 200 word comment about how dumb it was and systematically list every dumb thing about it, while providing examples of people who have done those things in meetings and how dumb they looked or sounded. Then I briefly skimmed over the other comments and realized that this was, in fact, satire. I breathed a sign of relief realizing that a) no one actually recommends these practices during meetings, and b) I didn't end up sounding like an idiot on the PTM blog for not realizing that something was sarcastic. That being said, why do these things always happen during meetings? Why is everybody so bent on looking like the most productive, most intelligent, and most connected person when in reality all that BS just eats up everyone's valuable time and patience? I vote that we all strive to avoid the practices in this article as much as possible, and some day we will live in a world with less annoying meetings.
I too, like Lucy, fully expected this article to be serious. I was preparing myself on the defensive. I loved this. This article was great. It gave me such a good chuckle, while also thinking about meeting habits that I have seen people inhabit. If anything, this article gave me a new lens in which to look at meetings. Instead of getting frustrated when I'm in a meeting by the things that this author was poking fun at, I will be able to laugh now. I'll be able to think about how hilarious it is that someone brought drumsticks into a meeting and is air drumming. I will not longer be frustrated by random white board doodles. What an odd thing meetings are - necessary, but universally considered annoying.
Though it appears this article was largely crafted with the intent of being humorous and satirical, some of the advice is (though perhaps incidentally) actually worth while. Some of the methods Cooper references to appear more involved will actually force someone to be more engaged, such as writing on a white board. Though serving up legitimate job tips was absolutely not what was intended here, this article delivers some excellent and sharp satire.
The line that states "your goal is to look like a real leader, while doing as little as possible" is exceptionally biting, and speaks to this increasingly widespread ideal that jobs should require minimum effort, with maximum return. I do however feel like there is a growing awareness of the lack of genuine productivity fostered by these kinds of meetings, and that modern business practices are working to eliminate the need for them, in addition to the posturing and power grabbing that they incur.
Like many others have mentioned, I went in taking this article seriously. As I was reading the article, I realized a lot of the advice the author gives are about stating things that are obvious that people can't disagree with, repeating something someone else said, things that open/end a meeting, etc - which all don't have actual content. I think the author's poking fun at people who can't differentiate between being dominating and being smart (of course, people can be both smart and dominating). From my experience, I don't necessarily consider the loudest people the smartest. To me, someone is smart if they give valuable ideas and opinions but don't talk just for the sake of talking/to be heard. If you're not adding to the conversation, the conversation isn't moving forward. The next time I hear people talking with no actual content/point they want to get across, I'll think of this article.
I honestly really appreciate this article because even if you haven’t been in a lot of corporate meetings, we’ve all been in positions like this. Sometimes even in a classroom setting it can feel like the main goal is to look as smart as you can while making as little effort as possible. When everyone is focused on how they are being perceived, people will talk just to sound good and listen just to reply rather than listening to understand and trying to genuinely contribute to a meaningful discussion. This is the one problem I have with the idea of participation grades, as someone who really struggles with speaking up if I don’t have anything I’d genuinely like to say, there are classes that I will sit there the entire time trying to think of something “good” to contribute instead of listening and learning like I would like to, just because I know it is expected that we speak up once a class. I know the idea is to encourage everyone to contribute, but sometimes it feels like those expected quotas of how much everyone should talk turns what could be an interesting discussion into a hodge-podge of unrelated talking points that people think will sound good to the instructors.
Wow okay I thought this was serious, too. Does this make me terrible, for assuming that a corporate man could write something like this as actual advice? Ouch.
Let me, then, give my advice for looking smart in a meeting. 1) Be...smart. You know what the topic of the meeting is going into it, so be informed about what you want to say. Do your research. 2) Determine your opinion before you speak. People are not going to find you "smart" if you flake on your opinions halfway through expressing them to the group. It comes across as weak and indecisive. If you know how you feel about a topic, state it clearly and confidently, and people will say, "Gosh she knows what she's talking about." 3) Be engaged. Listen to everyone, and ask questions that will move the conversation forward. Ask people why they feel the way they do. 4) Ask the right questions. Be aware of where the holes are in the conversation and make it your personal duty to have them filled. People will appreciate you valuing their time enough to make sure they're getting full details rather than leaving bits unexplained. 5) Sit up straight, stay awake, and nod when it's time to nod. Most people aren't going to assume you're stupid, so as long as you're passably human, I'm pretty sure they'll take you to be a smart, receptive person.
This is probably one of the corniest articles I’ve every read. I won’t disagree completely and say that meetings are interesting, because they aren’t and I would also probably agree with the idea of acting like you know what is going on, but pretty much every example in the article is something any corporate executive would see right through. “can I ask for a time check?” If anyone in a meeting said that probably was looking right at a clock and knows exactly when the meeting is over. So basically a big waste of time. Now just because some of the examples are a little far-fetched doesn’t mean that I don’t agree with some of the basic ideas and principals. Like finishing up with a follow up email is I really good idea to recap what was discussed in the meeting and also it gives people an over aching idea as to what talked about.
Post a Comment