What A Bad Meeting Looks Like

Meetings are wonderful servants. They are horrible masters. It’s valuable to have a strong idea of what makes a meeting good or bad.

If you’re like most organizations, you acknowledge that 1) your team could communicate better and 2) you have meeting gridlock. To shift your emphasis away from a meeting factory, consider this exhaustive list of traits of an unhealthy meeting. Agree? Disagree? I welcome your additions in the comments!

1. The quantity of people invited is significantly too high or too low

2. The quantity of attendees is significantly too high or too low

3. Poor punctuality causes …

   • a significant delay to starting the meeting, or

   • a mid-meeting disruption, or

   • mid-meeting rework

4. The agenda is unclear, poorly organized, or absent

5. There is no asset or relevant documentation for the meeting

6. It is unclear whether the meeting is designated for divergent thinking (ideation, creativity, brainstorming, expanding options) or convergent thinking (narrowing options, selection, decisions)

7. Although the meeting is intended for either divergent thinking or convergent thinking, the conversation doesn’t match

8. The meeting does not aim for alignment or for a decision

9. The meeting does not achieve alignment or a decision

10. Topic is so simple or simplistic that email could accomplish the meeting objectives (in academic terms, the conversation feels like 100-level stuff)

11. Some participants are unprepared for the meeting

    • They are unfamiliar with the relevant asset

    • They read the asset for the first time in the meeting itself

    • Some reactions and feedback are impulsive and not thoughtful

12. The conversation fails to stay on agenda and spends significant time on topics outside the scope of the asset

13. Duplicate or old ideas appear

14. Individuals with seniority do most of the talking

15. Individuals with seniority neglect or marginalize junior individuals

16. Someone rambles or monopolizes the conversation

17. Someone demonizes instead of disagrees

18. Personality conflict exists at the expense of task conflict

19. Comments stack up against each other; the meeting contains no silence

20. The meeting has a high level of awkward silence

21. The meeting feels limp, lethargic, or bored

22. The meeting feels hurried, frantic

23. Someone leaves the meeting feeling unheard, excluded, unwelcome, unsafe, suppressed, alienated, or demonized

24. The meeting feels like an improv game of “Yes, But” or an improv game of “No”

25. Participants fail to work hard to uncover the asset’s omissions, blind spots, inconsistencies, and waste

26. The asset, or the meeting, has no tiebreaker present

27. Participants fail to handle bad ideas with grace, resulting in someone’s embarrassment

28. Participants hear significant background noise that leads to the necessity of repeating comments

29. Too much multitasking occurs, resulting in distractions, rudeness, and the need to repeat questions

30. Someone wants to start a task list or document meeting minutes OUTSIDE the primary asset

31. Near the end of the meeting …

    • Reviewers are indecisive and ambiguous about the need for another review

    • Approvers are indecisive and ambiguous about their stance

32. At the end of the meeting, some participants feel …

    • Not a good use of anyone’s time

    • Email could have accomplished this

    • The conversation went way off agenda

33. Within a few days of the meeting, the facilitator fails to get new version of the asset to the appropriate stakeholders

---

It’s difficult to end your addiction to meetings and meeting gridlock. It can be a security blanket. But keep practicing and reinforcing a more fulfilling, productive, sustainable balance among meetings, emails, and assets. You’ll make life easier for your team, your stakeholders, and yourself.