The rise of the silent meeting

Meetings are indispensable to the functioning of any organisation. Whilst some people love them, there are just as many who hate them and see them as endless drains on their time, a hinder their productivity or the cause of their anxiety and stress.

Meetings are organised to share and exchange information. But are all meetings effective? Are all attendees equally proactive? Are all presentations engaging? Often the more introverted members of the team aren’t confident enough to put their views forward whilst the more extrovert just don't stop talking. Frequently meeting preparation isn’t done so people are guessing at what was proposed and are putting forward ideas that aren’t based on the complete picture. This all leads to time wasting, less knowledge sharing and the introverts hating meetings even more. But meetings do have their place so simply eliminating them isn’t an option hence the rise of the silent meeting.

Silence at work is often thought to be something that should be avoided so meetings often involve a lot of mindless chatter. But some companies have started to put silence at the forefront of what they do. Instead of the traditional bullet-pointed presentation kicking things off, meetings start with everyone studying a short document to access all the information. They can then make their own notes and think through their point of view before expressing it.

This process might seem to take up a large chunk of the allocated time but, because everyone has fully understood the information before they speak, repetition or confusion is cut out and only what’s really necessary gets discussed. Meetings therefore don’t take as long to conduct and are more productive. Silent meetings also give everyone the chance to speak and share their ideas which is especially important for quieter, more introverted team members who tend to stand back if other more confident people monopolise the conversation.

Silent meetings work in many forms and generally are better for remote attendees, non-native speakers, introverts and often for attendee equality. They operate equally well face-to-face or virtually so why not see if it works for your organisation.

A list of upcoming podcast guests is available here or read our previous blogs.
Find out more about our innovative Resilience and Burnout solutions.

Time Management. The bigger picture.

Jane Shaw is Learning & Development professional who started her career in the hospitality industry. She did a full time MBA at Henley then bought a pub in Suffolk, before going back to L&D, becoming an Associate specilising in senior leadership teams, EI, executive and group coaching. She is now starting a Masters in Business Psychology. She feels running a pub is very similar to learning and development. It’s about facilitating a room full of people - sometimes a very diverse group with some who want to be there and others that don’t.  

Jane considers herself a life long learner. For example everything she knew about leadership and management ten or twelve years ago has been reshaped completely.  Deepening knowledge also has the benefit of increasing self-awareness and the ability to empathise whilst exposure to different perspectives improves connection with other people. She also feels the process of learning is good for you with huge benefits to mental health. Learning or training whether academic or vocational is important to good mental health.

Jane doesn’t really believe in time management beyond the productivity checklist which she considers a helpful concept. She thinks time management is broader and bigger than this – it’s about how we manage ourselves and it links to many different things. Often people attend time management courses and come back very enthusiastic but after a short period slip back. Jane thinks the question we should be asking ourselves is how are we managing ourselves. In the bigger context it is apparent that more people are asking themselves this question now than three years ago. Post pandemic people are perhaps struggling to reset the boundaries, of what’s acceptable, about how they work, what productivity looks like and how that gets measured, how they compare themselves to others and their productivity and how they can still establish credibility with their bosses when there has been less presence around and people aren’t seen to be doing as much.

There is the question of whether it is about task management rather than time management. If you do the right things and do these things well then you are never doing nothing so why manage time when it’s about the choices you make. Every tool is about a task rather than the time itself. It's the same thing over and over again. The task is what matters not the time itself. You need to disengage to engage – its OK to not do anything, you just need to give yourself permission.

Leaders who inflict pointless meetings on the workforce are adding to burnout. The person who holds the meeting finds it more valuable and more enjoyable than anyone else. To many attendees it’s just a waste of time. Using Teams has made people feel that time is a limitless resource. Everyone is talking about going back to how it was but many people weren't happy with meetings before February 2020. Now it’s not about going back, it’s about cherry picking what was good and then moving forward. There is the opportunity to reframe. In poorly led organisations continuing to use the same processes and will produce inferior results and people will be expected to work harder but will still be doing the wrong things in the wrong way. Employees will walk away or end up taking time off with stress. People are slightly more fragile after Covid. Many have been stretched to the point of breaking but no one has informed the leadership world. Some old management ideas are still in place so it’s fundamental that we re-examine leadership to reset these ideas and be open to change. Influential thought leaders are saying that leadership cannot continue in the same way.

You can listen to the podcast in full and find out further information here. Our upcoming guest list is also available along with our previous blogs.

You can find out more at https://ninedotsdevelopment.com

Aligning Psychological Safety, Burnout and Resilience

Psychological Safety is something that Dr Thackeray has long been fascinated by. He is particularly interested in how it aligns with Burnout and Resilience so in this podcast he discusses:

• What psychological safety is

• What it’s all about

• What it has to offer us

• Some of the different theoretical ideas around psychological safety

Dr Thackeray feels that in order to build a psychologically safe culture we probably need to have psychologically safe people. But which comes first? This is where the challenge of resilience links together. The idea of resilience is that after making a mistake or error, resilient people are able to bounce back or forwards, to weather the storm, build capacity for change and understand themselves well enough to know where their own resilience may be compromised. They are able to make a mistake and come back from it.

Psychological Safety works on the idea that you can state the mistake so you don't actually make it or if you do, you can disclose it. So if you aren’t resilient are you able to be resilient in a non-psychologically safe culture? If you are resilient part of the way a making a psychologically safe culture is having the skills of resilience. The term burnout is used to describe a situation where people become exhausted and lose their capacity to care and to cope.  If you’re psychologically safe or talking about the correlation between overwork, a lack of care and burnout this may be an organisational indicator.

This is an increasingly important part of leadership and management. Dr Thackeray feels that part of the challenge is that leaders and managers have lost the subtlety to build a culture that is adult, robust and resilient, where people can still be accountable and responsible for the management of their own feelings. That in creating a psychologically safe culture, there is a risk of disempowering a manager to do what needs to be done.

In a psychologically safe culture leaders should be able to take feedback but Dr Thackeray feels that everybody needs to be able to take feedback. If anyone’s performance has gone off track there needs to be the type of culture where what needs to be said can be said. He thinks that having an adult culture is at the heart of psychological safety.  Having the ability to say I can be accountable, I cannot feel safe from time to time but also that sometimes I have to recognise my part in that process.

The question is how much baggage does a person bring into a psychologically safe environment? When we think about auditing people we need to have a baseline understanding of the level of anxiety that exists for people and also their level of independent safety. If you feel unsafe or feel anxious in your day to day life, your baseline of anxiety is going to be higher than other people so, when it comes to working in teams, having identity, purpose, fun and the ability to bounce ideas around, you are naturally going to be more anxious.

Does a leader therefore create a psychologically safe culture at the level of the most anxious person given that the most anxious person does not always divulge their anxiety? How do you create good practice? As well as great feedback that goes both ways, there needs to be a sense of camaraderie, of purpose and of meaning in the role that you’re doing. You have to have meetings where you say what needs to be said and you’re not shut down for putting forward an idea.

People can ask a very innocent question and someone can take offence or see a threat where there is none. There is a need to build intentionality in the culture, where people state that their intention is to build something but there may be times we it goes wrong but that shouldn’t mean we stop trying even if it isn’t always perfect. Dr Thackeray feels we have to test the culture and test the individual attitudes to anxiety before we start. We also need to have a sense of direction, a sense of meaning in the job and be able to speak out and share ideas without being laughed at.

When Dr Thackeray looks at the confluence of psychological safety, resilience and burnout, one of the key areas he considers is meeting’s. Often in meetings the happiest person is the one running it. People are there but they don't know why. It’s not relevant, it’s inefficient because it’s not the right medium. Meetings are where we can start to spot the issues. If people aren’t saying this meetings not for me, this meeting’s too long, do I need to be at that meeting they need to be more robust about the idea of return on investment and what they produce and where they invest their time. An adult culture allows anxious people to see the value in the time they are spending and making choices in where to spend that time.  So when a leader or manager asks where is the value of your contribution over the last week, that person can say this is the value of what I’ve achieved and this is where my value has diminished because of these effects.

There are always going to be meetings that need to be attended but there are numerous casual or careless meetings where people have just got into a routine. Meetings are where most people come together so if you cant challenge the team and speak out then there is an argument that you don't have psychological safety. If you don't have the confidence to talk to your manager directly, then that may be more of an issue between you and your manager. It might be down to your level of anxiety or their ability to lead you well. On a one-to-one level there is an equal responsibility to look at those things in both ways.

The question is how do we take leaders and managers to produce leadership, management and process that allows culture to be what we need it to be? 

You can listen to the podcast in full here.Our upcoming guest list is also available along with our previous blogs.