The common mistake executives make about meetings, and how you can avoid it

So much time is spent on holding meetings. While the employer is not paying us for having meetings, some formal discussions and announcements are necessary in order to make a certain decision.

Many executives fall into the trap of furiously preparing for a meeting, yet become frustrated when the whole presentation or proposal is totally rejected after presenting in a meeting.

This is because they make the mistake of believing that a meeting is a platform to discuss.

The truth is, no one likes to make decisions after a one hour bombardment of information from another party.

Decision making is comfortably done when a person has enough information and time to weigh the advantage and risks.

This is why, the real negotiation and discussions, are done prior to meetings. The more experienced executives and leader know, that the most guaranteed way to receive a greenlight to their proposal in a meeting is, to discuss with the concerned parties in advance, separately if needed. Details are laid over before the real meeting, and concerns are reviewed in advance. The official meeting only works as an official one hour with all parties, to go through all information together, and officially make the decision.

So the next time you have that brilliant idea to share in a meeting, don’t spend your precious time in preparing the slides. Instead, approach the concerned parties in advance, discuss and negotiate concerns before you step into the meeting. You’ll find the next 1 hour presentation and discussion a real breeze.

3 thoughts on “The common mistake executives make about meetings, and how you can avoid it

Add yours

  1. To approach concern party in advance also take some time. let say I have 5 people to approach than i will be wasting 5 times before the meeting actual time.
    Is there any way we can make an actual meeting better place for a discussion?

    Like

    1. Yes, approaching concerned parties prior to the actual meeting may seem redundant, but it is better to talk to concerned parties whom you believe will create ‘a scene’ in the meeting.

      This kind of people may need longer time and effort for explaining, and convincing, and surely we do not want to drag the actual meeting time with the rest of the meeting members.

      That is why talking to these people beforehand is better.

      It does not mean if there are 5 parties in the meeting, we need to approach all 5 beforehand. Only the selected few with the more difficult level of explaining and convincing.

      Like

      1. Understood, but i have concern, should i consider other people feeling when i approach certain people only? will others think that they are not important or will they think i play favorism?
        am i thinking too much?

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: