Edward De Bono presented a systematic approach to decision-making in 1985 with his Six Thinking Hats, which illuminates the various mindsets by which we grapple with a problem. Meetings expert Al Pittampalli recently offered another helpful perspective, delineating the five stages of problem solving. The stages – define the problem, generate solutions, evaluate solutions, pick a solution and make a plan – won’t hugely surprise you, but thinking about them in a systematic way during a meeting can keep you out of quicksand.
“Most bad meetings are not caused by lazy, power-tripped leaders, or entitled, self-centered attendees. Instead, they are caused by a simple mistake made by everyone involved. We assume our go-to way for solving problems alone, intuitively, can be effectively deployed to solve problems together. But more often than not, it can’t. Instead, we should hold methodical meetings, discussions that deliberately and explicitly aim to conquer just one stage at a time,” he writes in Harvard Business Review.
In intuitive problem solving, our usual personal approach, we move unthinkingly between those five stages. He give as example ordering food online. You begin by quickly generating a solution – Mexican, Stage 2 – but as soon as the thought enters your mind, you evaluate it, Stage 3, and remember that you had Mexican the day before, so you generate another solution, moving back to Stage 2, Indian. You evaluate that, again in Stage 3, but fear your go-to Chicken Tikka Masala is more than you can handle. So back to Stage 1, defining the problem: “What kind of meal would leave me feeling satisfied but not overly stuffed?” And so on.
It’s easy to do, alone. Effortless – magical even, he says. But it’s deadly in a meeting, with a bunch of people. Chaos is likely.
“In order for groups to collaborate effectively and avoid talking past one another, members must simultaneously occupy the same problem-solving stage. But because intuitions are private to their owners, attendees in group meetings are unable to easily discern what problem-solving stage they each are on. Consequently, members unknowingly begin the meeting on different stages,” he writes.
The solution is to address one problem-solving stage at a time, outlined on the agenda. In a sense, that echoes Mr. De Bono’s schema, where everyone puts on the same thinking hat at the same time. When the positive, yellow hat is on, for example, nobody is allowed to unleash their negative views, avoiding frustrating talking past one another and argumentative debate. They have to wait for black hat time.
But Mr. Pittampalli’s format may have missed a stage: Read-in. Jeff Bezos, chief executive of Amazon Inc., and Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter and Square, Inc., start their meetings by ensuring everyone is up-to-speed on a proposal. They sit and read briefing documents together, before moving on to discussion. The hurdle, of course, is we don’t want to sit still and read at a meeting. The lure is that Mr. Bezos and Mr. Dorsey are highly successful, and this could be part of the reason.
What goes into the document? Mr. De Bono’s six thinking hats are an excellent way of attacking any problem so could help frame the document. Mr. Pittampalli’s structure could also work. In Inc., contributing editor Geoffrey James suggests the following executive summary structure:
The Challenge: Define “where we are now.”
- The Undesired Outcome: Indicate “where we don’t want to be” – what will happen if the problem or opportunity is not addressed.
- The Desired Outcome: Move on to “where we do want to be.”
- The Proposed Solution: Outline what must be done to avoid the undesired outcome and achieve the desired one.
- The Risk Remover: Explain why the proposed solution is likely to succeed and unlikely to fail.
- The Call to Action: Putting the proposed solution into motion.
If each element is boiled down to one paragraph this could fit on one single-spaced sheet of paper. He warns against more than three pages and adds: “It must be a hard-copy document, not an electronic one. The point of the briefing document is to force participants to focus single-mindedly on the issue you want discussed. If you let people read on a screen, some of them will pretend to do so but actually read e-mail, etc. Sad but true.”
Together, these ideas can add rigour and substance to your meetings, reducing wasted time. You don’t just come to a meeting and chat; you come to a meeting and follow a structure, even in the document you might read together. Given the amount of time you spend on meetings, it’s worth experimenting – even in only some meetings – with the suggestions.
Cannonballs
- In seeking a more diversified workplace, rethink the time job interviews are held. HR consultant Suzanne Lucas points out people in less senior roles may have trouble getting the flexibility at their current job to come to an interview during work hours. Accommodate them.
- In judging character in job interviews, leadership coach Dan Rockwell recommends two questions. Tell me about a time when you struggled through adversity. What changed about you? And: Tell me about a time when you worked long and hard to develop a skill. What did you learn about yourself?
- What makes a good entrepreneur? There are elaborate quizzes to tell but here’s a simple test from Paychex Inc. founder and former Buffalo Sabres owner Tom Golisano in his book Built not Born: Do you question how every business you see – even a food truck – works? If you estimate that truck’s operating costs and calculate its net profits, automatically, you are definitely an entrepreneur.
Stay ahead in your career. We have a weekly Careers newsletter to give you guidance and tips on career management, leadership, business education and more. Sign up today.
Harvey Schachter