Introduction
Large meetings can be very unsatisfactory when people compete to talk and stop listening. The following notes describe a controlled and supportive process for handling a large meeting. This provides the efficiency of large meetings and the effective interaction of small ones.
These meetings need only take one and a half to two hours and time is money.
History
I first learned this approach from Jef Mason of JMA. He developed it from earlier work by Barry Schuttler who was a leading manager of local participation projects in the USA. Barry Schuttler called his approach “Charette”. “Charette” is a series of activities involving people in decision making about their environment. The procedure below is like those used in “Charette” for passing information and gathering reactions.
Typical procedure
1 Information
A senior manager or expert gives important information to a large group. This can be up to 150 people or more with a good public address system and overhead slides.
2 Clarification
Divide the total group into groups of eight to ten. Each member of the group lists questions that he or she requires answers to understand the information. An outsider or a group member lists these on a flip chart. The group prioritises them and an expert answers the most important ones. The flip charts are kept to aid the subsequent presentations.
3 Response
Small groups meet as in (2) above. The people now list their reactions, comments and feelings about the information now they have understood it. The prioritised comments are collected up from each group and responded to publicly by the Senior Manager.
4 Manager’s comments
The manager must not be too defensive. Some comments will be difficult to handle. If no answer is possible, say so. It helps to say we don’t know yet. The manager should take time to anticipate some comments and to practice handling them in a win/win way.
5 Resources and skills required
The listing on flip charts must be done accurately and carefully with time given for everyone to formulate questions and comments. A quiet inarticulate person may have valuable things to say. The Senior Manager must express the information clearly. Equally, he or she must be prepared to listen to and acknowledge responses that might sometimes be unexpected. People value genuineness highly. Experts require patience and the ability to put things in simple language without being patronising. One person should act as the ‘Process Manager’ or MC. This person moves people from one section to the other and keeps the programme on time.
Conclusions
This method creates rapid two way communication about key issues. It is lively, fun and motivating. It builds closer and more open relationships because it encourages trust and listening. The process has helped a car company manage change. It has also helped a company gain commitment of staff to a profit sharing scheme. The method could help any organisation increase the involvement and energy of its staff.
Finally
Further information is available from Nick Heap on 01707 886553 or Jef Mason on 020 8748 2367.