Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Sharon Villines (sharon![]() |
|
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 06:25:09 -0700 (PDT) |
Another way to look a the quality of meetings is to look at the usefulness of meetings. What are meetings intended to do? What purpose do they serve for those who are expected to attend? What is the aim? How will you know if it was a useful meeting?
"Quality" is in the eye of the beholder. I used to get so frustrated by having the evaluation at the end of the meeting be positive, "this was a good meeting," until I understood that what this meant was that no one yelled or got frustrated or walked out. That nothing was decided or understood or explained was not a concern. Just a nice pleasant discussion was a "good meeting". Sort of like a tea party.
I would prefer a meeting where people let it all hang out so "it" is clear and everyone knows how people are feeling and what needs to be resolved. A meeting in which there is a new understanding of how someone feels is useful, but may not meet the tea party criterion of a "good" meeting.
Sharon --- Sharon VillinesBuilding Community: A Newsletter on Coops, Condos, Cohousing, and Other New Neighborhoods
http://www.buildingcommunitynews.org
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions, (continued)
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Sharon Villines, September 10 2005
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions OCC611ng, September 10 2005
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Sharon Villines, September 10 2005
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Tree Bressen, September 10 2005
- Re: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Sharon Villines, September 11 2005
- RE: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Craig Ragland, September 11 2005
- RE: Getting Buy-In on Decisions Rob Sandelin, September 11 2005
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.