Saturday, May 31, 2008

Impact of Not Understanding Expectations

Recently conducted a team/planning intervention for a team with the results being less than I expected. On reflection, I did the necessary upfront scoping (one on one telephone interviews, team survey) followed by an analysis of needs. Put together the 1-day format which required defining team interpersonal and operational norms in the a.m. and planning in the P.M.

The results: the group attained the outcomes, but during an informal round-robin at the end some folks admitted that they were hoping for more planning time rather than teaming time. Results on the form varied from good -met my expectations (majority) to very good - exceeded my expectations. Now, I have to admit that the scores were good, however I got the sense that the client may have expected more on the 'planning' side. So what could I have done better? What was in my control?

In reviewing my process, there were some things I didn't do (yet I train all of my students to do this!). First, I should have ratified the 'outcomes' with the group. The agenda had been sent to them 2 days before the event (various reasons for this) which gave them little time pre-session to respond. I also didn't check out their 'expectations' for the day as I was concerned that time was tight. I might have heard upfront that the 'planning' was more of a priority than defining their operational guidelines (though in the long run, these too are important to planning). Knowing this would have led to a process adjustment, therefore lending more time to the 'planning' part of the discussion. Doing interim checks during the session to determine if the process was working for them would have helped too, though we did make some tweaks as issues came up.

Let me know if you have any further observations? This is part of my continuous learning objective!

Friday, May 30, 2008

See you in Regina!

Calling all meeting leaders:

I'll be in Regina June 23-24 leading a workshop on running more collaborative and productive meetings: Regina Public Workshop

Mention that you heard about the workshop from my blog and we'll give you a 10% discount. Call Suzanne at 1-888-465-9494 (416-465-9494).

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Making Meetings POP!

Recently, I've been using this acronym for what I believe is are critical components for making meetings work especially in the prep phase. I call it the POP method and it stands for Purpose (why we're here), Outcomes (what we're here to achieve) and Process (how we're going to achieve the outcomes and, ultimately, the purpose for the meeting). Though it's simple in form I've been amazed how many people have left my training workshops saying the 'POP' methodology will be huge for helping to make their meetings more effective.

I always used to just focus on 'purpose' and 'process' however when I added 'outcomes' I noticed how easier it was to help my clients define the the meeting purpose. As well, knowing the outcomes helps to consolidate the goals for the meeting therefore making my process steps easier to ascertain. I like 'outcomes' better than 'objectives' as outcomes can be framed as if the resulting learning already happened. Compared to objectives, outcomes seem to be more tangible and less 'future state'.

I was wondering if any facilitators that read this blog see the POP method as critical to their meeting prep? To what extent to you focus on 'outcomes' as compared to 'meeting objectives'? When you scope with the client does knowing the outcomes make your process development easier?