robust dialogue

You cannot have an execution culture without robust dialogue - one that brings reality to the surface through openness, candor, and informality. Robust dialogue makes an organization effective in gathering information, understanding the information, and reshaping it to produce decisions. It fosters creativity - most innovations and inventions are incubated through robust dialogue. Ultimately, it creates more competitive advantage and shareholder value.

Robust dialogue starts when people go in with open minds. They're not trapped by preconceptions or armed with a private agenda. They want to hear new information and choose the best alternatives, so they listen to all sides of the debate and make their own contributions. 

When people speak candidly, they express their real opinions, not those that will please the power players or maintain harmony. Indeed, harmony - sought by many leaders who wish to offend no one - can be the enemy of truth. It can squelch critical thinking and drive decision making underground. When harmony prevails, here's how things often get settled: after the key players leave the session, they quietly veto decisions they didn't like but didn't debate on the spot. A good motto to observe is "Truth over harmony." Candor helps wipe out the silent lies and pocket vetoes, and it prevents the stalled initiatives and rework that drain energy. 

Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan 

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 102, 103

clear priorities

Leaders who execute focus on a very few clear priorities that everyone can grasp. Why just a few? First, anybody who thinks through the logic of a business will see that focusing on three or four priorities will produce the best results from the resources at hand. Second, people in contemporary organizations need a small number of clear priorities to execute well. In an old-fashioned hierarchical company, this wasn't so much of a problem - people generally knew what to do, because the orders can down through the chain of command. But when decision making is decentralized or highly fragmented, as in a matrix organization, people at many levels have to make endless trade-offs. There's competition for resources, and ambiguity over decision rights and working relationships. Without carefully thought-out and clear priorities, people can get bogged down in warfare over who gets what and why. 

A leader who says "I've got ten priorities" doesn't know what he's talking about - he doesn't know himself what the most important things are. You've got to have these few, clearly realistic goals and priorities, which will influence the overall performance of the company. 

Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan

Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done by Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan with Charles Burck. 2002. Crown Business, NY, NY. p. 69

things truly confident people say

Here are the kinds of things you'll hear truly confident people say.

1. "I wouldn't worry about it."

Go to a confident friend with a list of "what-ifs" or reasons why something may turn out badly and you'll likely hear this kind of reassurance. It's because confident people generally don't worry. They understand that even if something goes wrong, they can handle it. It's the persistent feeling that regardless of what happens--good or bad--they will cope.

2. "Go for it."

Along with a lack of anxiety comes a sense of optimism. Truly confident people expect good things to happen. At the same time, their track record of making good decisions means they also possess the ability to temper their positivity with realistic thinking.

3. "Doing it this way works for me."

Confident individuals don't feel compelled to conform to gain acceptance from others. This is the central beauty of confidence--the calm self-assurance that makes others want to follow.

4. "Why not me?"

Instead of waiting around for the next opportunity, confident people seek it out. Maybe it's building the right relationships, asking for a promotion or otherwise taking a leap of faith. These people have a vision for the future and chart their own path to get there.   

5. "I need to say something."

Confident people take a stand when it comes to matters of right and wrong yet possess the wisdom to understand which battles are worth fighting. That said, they'll back down graciously if proved wrong, because they're secure enough to consider viewpoints other than their own.

6. "Tell me more."

Confident people listen far more than they talk, are naturally curious, and express a genuine interest in others. Conversely, those who monopolize conversations or brag (ever) have something to prove and are masking insecurity.

7. "Can you help me?"

Everyone has weaknesses, but the self-assured are not afraid to admit them. Instead of worrying what others will think if they ask for help, confident people are more concerned with self-improvement, gaining valuable skills, and performing a job well. 

Christina Desmarias

"7 Things Confident People Always Say," Inc.com. June 24, 2016

things can’t shape our decisions

You don’t have to turn this into something. It doesn’t have to upset you. Things can’t shape our decisions by themselves.

Marcus Aurelius

Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. Modern Library. 2003. P.81, Book 6, #52. Also see The Internet Classics Archive | The Meditations by Marcus Aurelius (mit.edu)

to know what is right

A President’s hardest task is not to do what is right, but to know what is right.

Lyndon B. Johnson

Historical Highlights: The First Televised Evening State of the Union Address, by Lyndon B. Johnson. January 04, 1965. History, Art & Archives: United States House of Representatives. As found in 2022 Great Quotes From Great Leaders Boxed Calendar: 365 Inspirational Quotes From Leaders Who Shaped the World.

we make a decision

Our Friday merchandising meeting is unique to retailing as far as I can tell. Here we have all these regional managers who have been out in the field all week long - they are the operations guys who direct the running of the stores. Then you have all your merchandising folks back in Bentonville - the people who buy for the stores. In retailing, there has always been a traditional, head-to-head confrontation between operations and merchandising. You know, the operations guys say, 'Why in the world would anybody buy this? It's a dog, and we'll never sell it.' Then the merchandising folks say, 'There's nothing wrong with that item. If you guys were smart enough to display it well and promote it properly, it would blow out the doors.' That's the way it is everywhere, including Wal-Mart. So we sit all these folks down together every Friday at the same table and just have at it.

We get into some of the doggonedest, knock-down drag-outs you have ever seen. But we have a rule. We never leave an item hanging. We will make a decision in that meeting even if it's wrong, and sometimes it is. But when the people come out of that room, you would be hard-pressed to tell which ones oppose it and which ones are for it. And once we've made that decision on Friday, we expect it to be acted on in all the stores on Saturday. What we guard against around here is people saying, 'Let's think about it.' We make a decision. Then we act on it."

David Glass

Sam Walton, Made in America by Sam Walton & John Huey. Bantam Books. 1992. p. 225, 226

fewer things done better

LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner sees "fewer things done better" as the most powerful mechanism for leadership. When he took the reins of the company he could easily have adopted the standard operating procedure of most Silicon Valley start-ups and tried to pursue everything. Instead, he said no to really good opportunities in order to pursue only the very best ones. He uses the acronym FCS (a.k.a. FOCUS) to teach his philosophy to his employees. The letters stand for "Fewer things done better," "Communicating the right information to the right people at the right time," and "Speed and quality of decision making." Indeed, this is what it means to lead essentially.

Greg McKeown

Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less by Greg McKeown. Crown/Archetype. 2020. p.239.

changing fast enough

Financial Times: A frequent argument is that Germans are not capable of reforming themselves.

Angela Merkel: I would say this is utter nonsense. The people in East Germany have lived through so many changes in the last 15 years like never before in the country, and they did this often with great enthusiasm. But in the West we also have a high degree of transformations. Everyone who is able to work today does so under very different conditions. The willingness to learn new skills is very high. If you ask people what they are prepared to do in order to adapt to globalisation they say “I am willing to learn new skills”. Parents today do no longer expect there children to come and work in the family business but they urge them to go for new careers.

It is nonsense to say that Germans are unable to change. The reason why we do not have the Transrapid high speed train in Germany is not because Germans would not accept new railways to be build. It has to do with the political environment and the very slow decision making process. In this respect politicians can change a lot to deliver changes much faster to the people. The question is not whether we are able to change but whether we are changing fast enough. There is still some convincing to be done. That is what we want to do in the campaign.

Transcript of Angela Merkel interview. Bertrand Benoit and Andrew Gowers. Financial Times.  JULY 20 2005. As found in 2022 Great Quotes From Great Leaders Boxed Calendar: 365 Inspirational Quotes From Leaders Who Shaped the World.

the essence of digital transformation

The essence of digital transformation is to become a data-driven organization, ensuring that key decisions, actions, and processes are strongly influenced by data-driven insights, rather than by human intuition. In other words, you will only transform when you have managed to change how people behave, and how things are done in your organization.

The Essential Components of Digital Transformation by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. Harvard Business Review. November 23, 2021

right at the end of a meeting

It’s important to be right at the end of a meeting, not at the beginning. If you embrace that mind-set, you’ll do a lot less talking in meetings, and focus instead on getting others to report facts and air their opinions. I stumbled onto this approach when I first arrived at Honeywell. Realizing I couldn’t trust my board or staff, I became a lot more careful about expressing my opinions up front. Then I realized I was making better decisions because I was allowing for a richer discussion. I proceeded to permanently change how I ran meetings.

David M. Cote

Winning Now, Winning Later: How Companies Can Succeed in the Short Term While Investing for the Long Term. HarperCollins Leadership. 2020. p. 24

tightening up your calendar

If you haven’t gotten serious about tightening up your calendar, now is the time to start. Do you really need all those meetings? Are there ways to minimize the length of essential meetings and still make progress? I am not against meetings – they are essential for leaders, not least because they help us bring facts to the surface and generate good decisions. At the same time, so many meetings are excessively long, unnecessary, and inconclusive. One of my favorite techniques is to require that teams provide me with a summary page at the beginning of the meeting or beforehand so that I could get the gist of the issue up front as well as the team’s recommendations rather than waiting for the story to unfold.

David M. Cote

Winning Now, Winning Later: How Companies Can Succeed in the Short Term While Investing for the Long Term. HarperCollins Leadership. 2020. p. 21

meeting ground rules

Specifying ground rules signals to participants that you intend to keep things moving efficiently.

• Reassert that you’re committed to beginning and ending on time (and then really do it).
• Ask for everyone’s participation and openness to new ideas.
• Agree to listen to each other and limit interruptions – and as the leader, enforce that rule.
• Clarify how decisions will be made. Let the group know right up front if this will be a group-decision meeting, a meeting that calls for participants’ input, or a meeting that shares a decision that has already been made.
• Explain your policy on multitasking and device use.
• Identify the final decision maker for each [agenda] item – especially if it’s not someone in the meeting )such as the CEO or department manager).

 

Martha Craumer

“Establish Ground Rules,” HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016. 

silence denotes agreement

Set one key ground rule: “Silence denotes agreement” or “qui tacet consentire videtur,” as it’s been known for centuries.

These three words do a great job of forcing people to open up, no matter how reluctant (or passive-aggressive) they may be feeling. Explain to people that if they don’t say anything when given a proposal or plan, they’re voting “yes” to it. Silence doesn’t mean “I’m not voting” or “I reserve the right to weigh in later.” It means “I’m completely on board with what’s being discussed.”

Bob Frisch and Cary Greene

“Before a Meeting, Tell Your Team That Silence Denotes Agreement,” Harvard Business Review. February 3, 2016 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

how many people?

How many people should you actually invite [to a meeting]? There are no hard and fast rules, but in principle, a small meeting is best to actually decide or accomplish something; a medium-sized meeting is ideal for brainstorming; and for communicating and rallying, you can go large. Some people use what’s known as the 8-18-1800 rule as a rough guideline:

• If you have to solve a problem or make a decision, invite no more than 8 people. If you have more participants, you may receive so much conflicting input that it’s difficult to deal with the problem or make the decision at hand.
• If you want to brainstorm, then you can go as high as 18 people.
• If the purpose of the meeting is for you to provide updates, invite however many people need to receive the updates. However, if everyone attending the meeting will be providing updates, limit the number of participants to no more than 18.
• If the purpose of the meeting is for you to rally the troops, go for 1,800 — or more!

HBR Editors

“How to Know If There Are Too Many People in Your Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 18, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

only the right people

For a meeting to be useful, you have to have the right people — and only the right people — in the room. With too many attendees, you may have trouble focusing everyone’s time and attention and accomplishing anything; with too few, you might not have the right decision makers or information providers in the room.

As you plan your attendee list, consider who will help you to accomplish your meeting’s goal and those who will be most affected by its outcome. Most likely this is a combination of people who will offer a variety of perspectives. Take the time to methodically list the individuals in each of these categories to make sure you include the right people:

• The key decision makers for the issues involved
• The ones with information and knowledge about the topics under discussion
• People who have a commitment to or a stake in the issues
• Those who need to know about the information you have to report in order to do their jobs
• Anyone who will be required to implement any decisions made

HBR Editors

“How to Know If There Are Too Many People in Your Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 18, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

three functional purposes for meetings

 …there are only three functional purposes for having a business meeting:

1. To inform and bring people up to speed.

2. To seek input from people.

3. To ask for approval.

Use this as a filter to determine why you are having a meeting and explain that purpose to your audience. Your meetings may often cut across multiple objectives but forcing yourself to clarify the agenda into these three purposes can result in more effective meetings.

Anthony K. Tjan

“The Key to Shorter, Better Meetings,” Harvard Business Review. June 23, 2009 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

meeting plus/delta

End the meeting with a plus/delta. If your team meets regularly, two questions form a simple continuous improvement process: What did we do well? What do we want to do differently for the next meeting? Investing five or ten minutes will enable the team to improve performance, working relationships, and team member satisfaction. Here are some questions to consider when identifying what the team has done well and what it wants to do differently:

• Was the agenda distributed in time for everyone to prepare?
• How well did team members prepare for the meeting?
• How well did we estimate the time needed for each agenda item?
• How well did we allocate our time for decision making and discussion?
• How well did everyone stay on-topic? How well did team members speak up when they thought someone was off-topic?
• How effective was the process for each agenda item?

To ensure that your team follows through, review the results of the plus/delta at the beginning of the next meeting.

Roger Schwarz

“How to Design an Agenda for an Effective Meeting,” Harvard Business Review. March 19, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

never hold a meeting just to update people

“If you’re already meeting for worthwhile topics, you can do a quick update,” says Axtell. You might say at the end, Is there anything that the group needs to be aware of before we leave? Is there something going on in your department that others needs to be know about? “But if you’re only meeting to transfer information, rethink your approach. Why take up valuable time saying something you can just email?” says Axtell.

And update meetings aren’t just time-wasters. Gino explains that research by Roy Baumeister, Kathleen Vohs and their colleagues suggests that we have a limited amount of what they call “executive” resources. “Once they get depleted, we make bad decisions or choices,” says Gino. “Business meetings require people to commit, focus, and make decisions, with little or no attention paid to the depletion of the finite cognitive resources of the participants — particularly if the meetings are long or too frequent,” says Gino. She finds something similar in her own research: that “depletion of our executive resources can even lead to poor judgment and unethical behavior.” So if you can avoid scheduling yet another meeting, you should.

Amy Gallo

“The Condensed Guide to Running Meetings,” Harvard Business Review. July 6, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.

collaborative interactions

 

Aaron De Smet, Caitlin Hewes, Mengwei Luo, J.R. Maxwell and Patrick Simon

“If we’re all so busy, why isn’t anything getting done?,” mckinsey.com January 10, 2022

let's schedule a meeting

“Let’s schedule a meeting” has become the universal default response to most business issues. Not sure what to do on a project? Let’s schedule a meeting. Have a few ideas to share? Let’s schedule a meeting. Struggling with taking action? Let’s schedule a meeting.

Although scheduling a meeting can be the right solution in many instances, it’s not always the best answer. I’ve come up with a decision tree to help you quickly determine if a meeting makes the most sense.

Elizabeth Grace Saunders

“Do You Really Need to Hold That Meeting?,” Harvard Business Review. March 20, 2015 as quoted in HBR Guide to Making Every Meeting Matter. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016.