How to Design a Meaningful Meeting with Monica Pauls

Speaker A: When we just follow an agenda because it's on the agenda or push through to get the thing done because it's, because that we think that's the goal. I think that is when it leads to really kind of poor half decisions and again, probably surfacing later. So in the long run, it's actually taking us more time than just recentering, resetting, then going back into things with a bit more of a clear mind and body.

Speaker B: This is leaderful, where we give you the models and the frameworks, the strategies and the skills that you need to drive true transformation for yourself, your team, your organization and the world. Welcome to the show. All right, welcome back to another episode of the Leaderful Podcast. My name is Jeff Coulard and, um, I'm your host. And you'll recognize a familiar voice today. Nick Etheridge Calder joins me along with Monica Pauls. Monica is the chair of the Department of Child Studies and Social Work and is an associate professor at Mount Royal University. She has extensive experience in applied research, program development, program evaluation, and policy analysis. Today we're going to take a really hands on approach to talking about designing and facilitating high impact meetings. And so Monica is bringing to the table an upcoming meeting, a session, a full day session with her team at the university. Nick and I are going to talk through it using the six Ps of, of high impact meetings as a bit of a guideline and then invite Monica into responding to that. And so I'll invite you to listen into this conversation with Monica and Nick. Monica, Nick, thank you so much for joining me on the Leaderful podcast. I'm really looking forward to today's discussion about designing and facilitating high impact meetings. And Monica, thank you so much for agreeing to be a guinea pig and step into the hot seat, um, and bring a challenge that you're wrestling with, uh, to the table.

Speaker C: Thank you. I'm happy to be here.

Speaker B: Well, maybe we'll, we'll kick things off. And so the intention of today's episode and conversation is really just to do some live coaching around a meeting that you've got, an important meeting you've got coming up with your team around and accessing Nick and my brain to talk it through and chat through. And so hopefully there'll be some nuggets of wisdom or value that you get out of this conversation as well. But why don't you start with just giving us some context about the team you lead, the type of meeting that you're trying to design for, maybe the outcomes that you're after with that, uh, meeting and then we'll have. Probably have some questions for you before we jump in.

Speaker C: Sure. So, um, I work at a university. I'm chair of a department. And uh, we have a, ah, program meeting coming ah up. It's a, ah, full team meeting where we come together for about six hours and plan for the year ahead. So we will do a, uh, few activities that are mandatory, I'd say, like kind of directives from our higher ups where we kind of update

Speaker A: pieces, uh,

Speaker C: of work or curriculum or different things like that. Um, and then we'll also be planning for some really big um, initiatives that we have next year. Um, it is really important work. We have to come together in person to do the work. Um, but not everybody in the team will be there. Some people, I would say, probably don't feel the work is as important or they're not as interested as other people. Um, and so, yeah, so, um, I guess that some of my challenges going into it is that, you know, I want people to want to be there, but I don't. I don't know how to make someone feel like that. Um, some of the activities might feel a bit repetitive. Like we've done them in other days like this. Um, we do this meeting every year. I think that because not everybody's going to be there, um, there might be some, um, underlying resentment. I don't know, you know, if that will come out, but I just sense that it might. Some people feel it's like certain people's jobs to do work, the work, and other people are responsible for different things and those kinds of feelings might exist. And then in terms of what I'd like to see coming out of the meeting would be that, um, just people feel like it was time well spent, that we've actually moved forward in a way, like as a team, as a program, um, and that they come and engage, like genuinely engage in the work. They're not just kind of physically there, but they're there and feeling like they're contributing and they're appreciated and valued and that it's all going towards something that we're invested in.

Speaker A: One thing I heard was that there's some components of this work that are kind of mandated processes you need to follow or boxes you need to check off. I'm curious, um, I'm curious about that, like how much of it is mandated? What's the mix of activities that you have, have to accomplish through the day?

Speaker C: I'm gonna say probably about 50, 50. So some of it, like half of the work would be mandated. Um, Just like, yeah, like we have to do these things as a program. And the other half, it's not mandated, but it has to be done in order for us to, for example, do engage in program review the following year. Or there's different. There's different pieces that do have to happen, but it's not necessarily mandated.

Speaker A: So some of it is preparatory, like preparing for the year ahead, uh, getting things set up, which is essential, but maybe not a checkbox. And then other things are. Are things that you need to say.

Speaker C: Yeah. Yes.

Speaker B: Um, Nick, do you want to give a note to the listener of our plan for today's conversation? Because we're going to. That's okay. That's, um.

Speaker A: What are we doing? Thank you, Monica, for sharing this. This overview of your meeting and the challenge with it. Um, the approach that we're going to take is inspired by Troika, uh, consulting, which is part of. I got it from the Liberating Structures website. So it's just the flow of this conversation is for you to provide your overview, which you've done. Then we will ask some clarifying questions. I saw Jeff taking notes, so I think he has some. Uh, I'll give him a turn and then I have a couple more. Um, and shortly we'll switch into kind of a listening and consulting round. Um, but the way this model works is that you don't have to respond to anything. You get to step back and kind of take yourself out of the conversation a little bit and just listen to what Jeff and I are saying. We're going to be using the six Ps, which is a model that we use around having high impact and good meetings. Um, we'll walk through that shortly and then we'll bring you back on to see what landed, um, and what comes next.

Speaker C: That's great.

Speaker B: Thanks, Nick. And yes, I was taking notes. I've been scratching down some like, m things that Jeff thinks about. So I'm going to ask a couple of my clarifying questions and then, uh, I'll pass it back over to you. Nick. Um, you mentioned a couple of big initiatives or planning for big initiatives. Who owns those? Do the people in the room, like, do you have the owners of those initiatives with you in the room? In the room?

Speaker C: Not, not really. Like, I would say, it's our responsibility as a team. So, uh, I don't know if ownership is the right word for it, but I would think, like, we are all responsible for engaging in this as we move our program forward and evolve and grow and, and so on. Okay.

Speaker B: Uh, Maybe a follow up, clarifying question. Are these university initiatives that you're kind of responsing, responding to and operationalizing or are they program initiatives that you have as a team, the ownership of?

Speaker C: Yeah, so some of it is a university initiative that we would be going through and then because of or in part or after the fact, after we kind of go through those initiatives, we'll be branching out on our team. Team initiatives. So um, you know, in terms of further developing the program or changing things up or exploring new ideas, that kind of thing.

Speaker B: Altitude wise, are the conversations that you're anticipating at uh, a kind of strategic level, kind of vision and values and strategy, or is it more about uh, maybe more tactical, logistical? And it might be a breadth of those things. But do you have a sense of, kind of overall picture of the day? Is it a higher level strategy? Are you kind of into the weeds of, of the work?

Speaker C: Yeah, some of the activities, especially the ones I think that we are kind of required to do, would be more practical, like what's happening here. In this case, we're documenting different things that we've been doing in the program over the year and we're reporting on that. So much more practical. Once we get into the initiatives for next year. It's a little bit higher level at this time.

Speaker B: This is not about this meeting. This question is about typical meetings with this group. What are some of the challenges, barriers, obstacles that you've run into? I, I picked up a little bit of a, maybe some anxiety or uncertainty about engagement levels and having kind of a range of engagement showing up in the room. Is that typical of your meetings? You know, if you had to rate them or rank them or you know, assess your meeting, your typical meetings, how do they go?

Speaker C: Yeah, I think it's very typical of our meetings. Um, so the level of engagement and also the, the way that people engage maybe, um, like the online offline is always kind of a bone of contention almost. But um, that's not an option in this meeting. It's like in person or if you can't come, then you just won't be there. But um, yeah. And then so the way, the way that people engage, the level of engagement and then I guess how invested people are in the topics varies. And so we see that sometimes people are really interested in engaging and then other times they seem to just not. They don't engage and I just don't think they think that is important to them.

Speaker B: I will keep asking questions all day, so I'm going to pass it over to Nick For. For some of this. Because otherwise I will just keep peppering you. M.

Speaker A: How. How engaged does everyone need to be on every topic? Is it. Are there things that you go through, something that you need everyone's input on? Um, for every topic?

Speaker C: I don't think that they all need to have input on every topic, but I do worry that if they don't provide input, that after the fact, they'll kind of either come forward with a complaint about it or, like, talk about it with other people about how they weren't included in a decision, or they just felt like the direction we're going isn't what they want, but yet they didn't provide the input.

Speaker A: Are there any other strategies that you've used that, uh, have been successful to gather input from folks?

Speaker C: So I've tried a few things. Like, if it's a specific, um, even like a visionary exercise or something, maybe like providing a survey, like an online survey where they could write some ideas or thoughts on a particular idea. Um, that's not been that successful. I haven't really gotten very much engagement that way. I've, I guess just. Yeah. Opening up in the meeting opportunities for everybody to talk. Um, going around and providing that space, um, has also been used. But, like, we often, like almost every meeting, we run out of time. Like, we never get through the whole agenda. And that's, I feel like potentially maybe because I've opened the space to talk about something, we can't land anywhere and then we just run out of time. Right.

Speaker A: How would you like to feel leaving this meeting when it's. When it's closed and concluded? How would you like to feel walking away from it? And how would you like participants to feel?

Speaker C: I'd like to feel that, um, I've run, like, an efficient meeting, that we've accomplished, like, specific decisions, uh, or like made certain decisions or accomplished certain outcomes. I want. I don't want people to walk away and be like. Feel like they wasted the day, they could have been doing something better, that, um, they really hate going to this meeting. And I just. Yeah, I. I guess I just want that kind of feel like we've made progress. Like, so whether that's identifying, like, specific things that, to me represent progress or. Or how that's defined, I don't know.

Speaker A: I feel like we could keep asking lots of questions on one night Q& A podcast, but we could probably shift

Speaker B: gears into, uh, talking about it. One last question from me, and then Nick will give you an opportunity, and then we can, uh, shift gears a little bit. Have you surfaced with this particular team some of your concerns around engagement or addressed it directly around expectation, setting and norms on participation and meeting design and flow and all of that?

Speaker C: Uh, I don't, I don't think I have, like, not directly. Yeah. So I think there's a lot of underlying stuff. Potentially. The, the other thing to note is like, if you saw us, you'd probably think we all get along great. Like, I think there's like some really nice relationships in our team that maybe adds a little bit to the challenge because we are, we do have like good personal relationships and we all are, uh, like treat people with, treat each other with respect. So I think there's maybe some underlying things though that sit there.

Speaker A: I'm good. I think we, we can shift.

Speaker B: Okay, let's try it. Let's shift gears. So Monica, you're welcome to just sit back and listen. Nick and I are going to bounce some of this around. We're going to use our kind of 6Pmodel as a, as a handrail or as a guideline kind of to keep us a little bit on track. Um, and with that, Nick, I'm going to let you kick us off. The first P is purpose. This idea of purpose, um, being clear and compelling for our high impact meetings.

Speaker A: Yeah, when I was thinking about this, feels it's not necessarily linear, the six Ps, we don't necessarily need to start a purpose and there's lots of interconnection between all of these P's, but it does feel like this very powerful starting point to really clearly identify what is it that we want to accomplish at this meeting? Why does this matter? What is the ideal outcome? And I think as, um, I'm listening, I'm picking up snippets and it almost feels to me like there's a lot. I mean this is a common problem, I would say with most of our meetings. We kind of meet because we're scheduled to meet, we meet because we're a team. And then we fit everything in that we need to discuss into that one context. For me, it's feeling like this is a very loaded meeting. Like there's a lot of purposes at once. And in that context maybe it's hard to find the way forward or to understand then the next P, which I'm not going to move to, but like who needs to be there? And so it kind of cascades into the other P's, um, that we have as well. And I think I'm still sensing that maybe there's that Monica, that Monica isn't clear on exactly what is the most important purpose of this meeting. What is the ideal outcome? Um, yeah, Jeff, what did you hear around purpose?

Speaker B: Yeah, and I think it's like all day meetings suffer for this especially like we put a lot of energy into these like all day and off site retreat for a couple of days or this like annual thing that we do. And we try and jam a bunch of purposes into it. And some of them belong to the team and some of them belong to the organization. And so the university has purposes, they're trying to get into that meeting, but then everyone has to buy into those purposes. And so clarity of purpose I think is important. It's okay to have multiple purposes for a meeting that lasts an entire day. Um, but to get really clear about this is the purpose of this section of this and this is why it matters. And this is what we need as far as engagement goes in order to be successful, to move on. So there might be an. I'm always curious about like the primary outcome, like what's the one thing that we can do with this meeting? A full day meeting is a bit different than that. You might have a couple. Um, but there's a piece of me that wanders around. There's the tactical, logistical, efficient, get through, make the decisions. And then there's the opportunity for relational connection and transparency and engagement. And some of the, like how we want the team to feel and work together is its own kind of outcome. And oftentimes I think we forget to design for that. I'm guilty of that. Where it's like, here's the agenda, everything gets 20 minutes and we're just going to bang it out, um, and we leave. And we're not maybe more connected than we were moving in, which could be its own goal. So um, for me it's that kind of like there might be a purpose around team and the team experience and then designing intentionally for that, uh, and creating some space for that. And then there's the logistical, more tactical things, which is probably why I asked the altitude question a little bit too is to figure out like what altitude you probably have multiple altitudes and different purposes. And the danger of those types of meetings is that we try and get through everything and we're moving too fast and where we need to slow down, we don't. And where we could maybe speed things up and make a decision, we get bogged down because we're operating with different kind of cross purposes, um, in those moments. But yeah, so I think clarity of purpose is a hugely critical One.

Speaker A: Yeah. And I think that ties into uh, a kind of already signal to it. The next one is people. Um, and if we have clarity around what it is we want to achieve from this meeting, what the ideal outcome is, that could then I think lead really well into who are the people that need to be in the room and is it all people that need to be in the room just because they're on the team and we want to have their perspective and voice? I mean, I heard that uh, as Monica was talking, I hear this like, desire to have everyone included in the decision making process, which is. So that is really important in order to move things forward so there isn't the meeting after the meeting and all of those pieces. What, what I became curious about around people is where do people need to be consulted, where do people need to be informed and where do people need to be engaged in the actual decision making process? And I might be getting into another P. But uh, I'm also curious about the actual decision making process that is used. How do people buy into something? How do people, um, object to a decision? Um, is there a process designed around eliciting for objections or, or getting everyone to actually consent or to, to kind of agree on what, what the plan is moving forward? Those are kind of some things that came in and I think, think I'm crossing over into some process stuff. This shows how interconnected there they are.

Speaker B: Again, not, not a linear framework or model. But I agree that the people piece, you know, sounds like there might be different roles that people play at different pieces of the day as well. Like in there might be a shifting, an intentional shifting of roles or hats that we're asking people to wear. Um, I think one of the most common things I see in decision making that bogs decision making down is that we don't separate the kind of problem defining with the problem solving. We kind of jam them all together and we. Some people think they're solving the problem and making a decision and some people think they're talking through the problem. Right. So getting even, just separating them with a break sometimes, like, hey, we're going to spend 20 minutes or half an hour talking about the objectives of this project or this challenge or issue that we're trying to solve for. Let's go away, let's come back and let's intentionally walk through some sort of decision making process to say, do we have direction?

Speaker A: Uh, right.

Speaker B: And sometimes when we do that initial framing, we realize that this actually isn't a team decision. This is a Monica decision or this is somebody else on the team. And it is more of a consultation that we're asking for. Like what's your perspective on this? We're not asking them to actually make a decision together. Um, again we're going to bleed into process here a little bit, but lots of teams suffer from a consensus decision making process where we're trying to get everybody 100% bought in on something. And it's like, well if you don't own it, right, if it's not within your responsibility, maybe you don't have the ability to stonewall or block it or of object to it. So again, to your point around objection criteria, like we might have to have ah, some of those conversations um, with folks. But I think there's probably an opportunity, um, when I think about designing for this particular meeting to think through what, what are the, those big issues or those challenges or those initiatives, what are the team's actual roles in it? And it might just be a get. They need to be informed about this and it can be a 10 minute piece of the agenda. Um, but I know I'm like guilty as charged. I've opened up space for conversation and an hour later we're like, oh, we haven't actually gotten anywhere. And this isn't a team decision, this is a me decision. And I really just needed you to say yes or no. Um, so getting some clarity on the roles that people have in the, in the space, um, I think is helpful.

Speaker A: The next p. I think the next P is power. So I wrote this. Okay, good. M. Um, yeah, and this feels like a really important one. And I think there's um, we often borrow from the right use of power framework in terms of understanding different levels of power. Um, I think it was before we started recording we were having a bit of a conversation around uh, role power that could be in the room, like Monica as the chair and the most senior person in the room. Um, but there's probably other roles that people occupy within that system. So there's probably some hierarchy and some differences in people's roles, goals that may not even be named. Like they might not be things we uh, it's often not named or talk about but it creates a little bit of a dynamic, um, particularly around decision making or people voicing dissenting opinions or how they approach that or how things might come out sideways. I think about that power piece that's important. And of course there's other types of power um, that are in the room as well, beyond the, even the role power. And yeah, uh, I found myself Curious about how much consciousness is present around people's power and how that might impact decisions and what shows up in the, in the space, in the room.

Speaker B: Power ultimately becomes the thing. Like we talk about participation as well and empowerment. And my, my sense from Monica is that she wants the team to feel bought in and engaged and empowered as a part of this process. It's not just, uh, a passive thing. Like, it's kind of active contribution. And that takes power. Like, we have to be able to use the power we have in a space. And sometimes we rely on people's personal power. It's like, how much power can you muster up in the morning? Get yourself to this meeting and like, really lean into the discomfort of the challenging conversation versus being conscious of role power and status power and collective power and starting to harness those different types of power, um, more intentionally. Um, and so there's always an opportunity there to think about how might power dynamics impact someone's willingness to participate or ability to participate to the full extent that we want them to, um, in that space and then being just conscious of that and designing intentionally around that. And I think about, like, one of the best pieces of feedback I ever got was from a youth worker. I was the manager at the time, um, and I was really passionate about the work. And I'd get excited about the work and I'd be in a team meeting and I would open my mouth prematurely and I would give an opinion and it would shut the conversation down and I'd be totally oblivious to it because everyone would suddenly nod their head and be like, okay, Jeff has spoken. Decision has been made. Not intentionally on my part, but the power that I held was such that I was the longest standing team member. I had the most willpower. And so all of a sudden my, the weight of my opinion, perspective, whatever it is, was significantly, you know, carried more weight. So, um, that's the best feedback I ever got was like, hey, Jeff, have you noticed when you open your mouth, it stops the conversation? It's like, oh, I'm going to start talking later in the conversation or not at all. Maybe this is just a Jeff listens kind of thing. So just being conscious of those power dynamics is, uh, a big piece of

Speaker A: another, I think, um, dynamic that we've, Jeff and I have seen is when certain, the conversation is circling. Let's say there's 10 people in the room, but the conversation is circling between three people constantly. And we're hearing from some people, we're not hearing from others. Um, I guess being conscious of that I think this ties in well to process. So what processes can we put into place that would help to um, distribute the voices? For example, does everything need to be an everyone discussion? Is everything around one large table or do we break off into working groups? Can some of these projects be broken up by interest? Hey, I'm really interested in this and this project. I'm going to go over here to this smaller conversation. It can become easier to speak in rounds in that because you know, if you don't have to hear from. I think the numbers are around 12 to 15. If we don't have to hear from 15 people for everything, we can actually make sure we hear from everyone in smaller groups and then come back to the larger group with a more concrete proposal. This is what we talked about, this is where we landed and kind of all agreed to this and then hear from the larger group if there's anyone who's kind of unsettled or has anything additional that wasn't considered. Um, so I think about tools like that that actually are processes that can help us to manage the power differential or power dynamics that just occur. Maybe because someone's more extroverted or whatever else is at play within that system.

Speaker B: You've nudges right into the fourth P which is process, which is great because that's the next, next uh, thing to consider. And I think um, like I love breakouts personally. Um, especially as the group gets larger it gets harder and harder to accommodate a um, meaningful discussion. I think the we often default to like open dialogue and it's actually kind of the worst group norm or the worst way to have a conversation as a bunch of people is to just like leave the space open and whoever feels the most passionate about a thing suddenly has all the airtime. Right. And so some level of rounds. Um, but I love the breakouts. Um, and I think there's probably an opportunity here because there is varying levels of buy in and engagement. I'd be curious if Monica has like three or four initiatives that are kind of at the same time altitude. Maybe they're programmatic things that we could break people up into groups to do a bit of that work and thinking and then just to report back and do a bit of a share back in reactions or something might um, also with a full day, I think process wise like varying the energy, varying the type of space we're in, like opportunities to go to different places on campus for different environments, um, depending on what the task at hand might be is kind of varying up the environment a little bit. Um, but as well, the process piece being thoughtful about, like, how can we get there? I heard efficiency is something that's, you know, sounds like something that's important to Monica. So, like, how do we build a structure that gets us there, A to B, a little faster? Right. Um, but also doesn't risk not bringing everybody along or whoever needs to be brought along. That's the down. The shadow side of efficiency is that we just, like, decision made, off we go. And people are sitting there with feedback or perspective that didn't get meaningfully incorporated. So, um, yeah. What other process things, um, are you thinking about?

Speaker A: Yeah, I think the. I was ready to go to presence.

Speaker B: I know you were.

Speaker A: Um, so I'll rewind my mind a little bit. I think that they're kind of interconnected, actually, the process, presence and pace things. I'm thinking a lot for a full day with this number of people. I think a lot of varied activities is really helpful. Uh, a lot of variety. I really love the example, Jeff, of even variety and environments. So being able to step out of the space. I do think that. So I'm ready to go. Gotta go into presence. Because this is. This, I think, helps us to be, uh, centered, regulated, so then we can make the best possible decision. So if we can step outside, you know, be outside for a moment, if we can take some breaks, ground ourselves, if we can be really attuned to the room. And this is not just Monica's responsibility. I think you may be even naming it at the beginning of a meeting, saying it's everyone's responsibility. If you're feeling unsettled, fidgety, if you really need a break, you might be noticing something that's surfacing in the system that we actually all need a break. It's not just on Monica. It's actually on all of us to name. Okay. We need to shift our energy. We need to shift what, um, we're doing right now. And maybe that's doing something collective, differently and a little bit of a different thing than maybe what was on the agenda or what was planned. Um, so that we can be as centered and regulated as possible. So we can take a break and reset so that we can come back to what matters the most. What are we really trying to get out of this meeting? Um, I think that is, like, really critically important. And when we just follow an agenda because it's on the agenda or push through to get the thing done because it's. Because that we think that's the goal. I think that is when it leads to really kind of poor half decisions and again probably surfacing later. So in the long run it's actually taking us more time than just recentering resetting and then going back into things with a bit more of a clear mind and body.

Speaker B: I really uh, I'm going to keep us on process for a second but I agree to the importance of process. Um, just when I asked Monica about a clarifying question about how much intentionality the team has put into designing how they want to be together in their meetings and there might be an opportunity to start your day or start the day with some really clear, here's some key objectives but like let's talk about what needs to be true, how do we each need to show up and what are we going to be accountable to and to that point because then it does distribute some of that because I've been in spaces and Monica, I'm sure you've felt this before where it's like all the burden becomes all of a sudden is on the leader or the facilitator to hold people accountable and coax them into giving their opinion and like keeping things moving. It's like some of that can actually be designed together as a group and some commitments made on the front end that we, and we call it Design Team alliance would be the bigger version of like your team is coming together to do that. But we can do mini versions of the similar process to start important sessions and with a full day, you know, a little bit of time up front to set some clear expectations and invite people into naming the behaviors that are going to be helpful and unhelpful. You know, sometimes that ah, even just that prompt, what's going to help us get here today and what's going to get in the way and we'll get the, hey, if we're on our laptop scrolling our emails that's not going to be the most you know, grounding thing we can do today. So let's put the tech aside or let's like make just some really clear concrete behaviors that'll help to, for presence probably at the end of the day to ground in that presence. So connected to that.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: Mhm. Yeah, I love that suggestion. And we did actually we kind of shared this, um, a little bit of a pared down version of a Design Team alliance. One pager at the ah, high impact workshop. So maybe using that or a component of that uh, could be a useful tool. So do you have anything else to say about presence Jeff, or should we move to pace?

Speaker B: No, I think that's, I Mean, it's always the bit of the wild card. It's the thing that you can have lots of good intention around. When you're setting up for meeting and you're thinking through the agenda and all the activities, then you get in the room and there's something there that hasn't been accounted for. There's an energy or there's a lack of energy or there's just a something and instead of avoiding that is like, go at it directly. I always try and like I have to often just park the agenda and be like, hey, what's here that we're missing? Or what's getting in the way of this conversation? And let's name it. And it might be actually, we need a break and let's take the break. Um, and so just being tuned into that, um, I think is the most important thing. Being tuned into your own presence as a facilitator too. Um, and noticing maybe where we're feeling some urgency or anxiety about getting through something can um, be a signal that there's something in the system that, that needs to be surfaced as a group and chatted through or designed for in the moment. But, um, we're kind of right up against the allotted time for Nick and I bouncing things around. So let's talk about pace.

Speaker A: Yeah, the, the thing that's coming to mind for me around pace, I mean it, it almost feels like those last three ones are just so deeply interconnected. And the PACE piece is again, as a facilitator, as one of the owners of the meeting, noticing when things maybe need to slow down or speed up. I think pace is really influenced by the purpose as well. Um, and for example, in a meeting where it's all about kind of connecting or getting to know each other, that might have a different pace than a meeting that is about getting decisions made, moving things forward, getting things done. So I think the purpose is part of understanding clearly what the purpose is might, you know, kind of clarify the pace. Or if it does end up being that there are multiple purposes, then maybe the pace looks differently throughout the day. And uh, the other thing that maybe this is back to process. Um, but, uh, the other thing again, around not owning it all as the most senior person in the room, role wise, maybe it does make sense to uh, distribute some of the roles that you're showing up with that day with some of the other people in the room kind of co. Owning paying attention to certain things. Maybe you're not the only facilitator you've called other people in as Facilitators or hats are being shifted throughout the day. So that ownership of you know, facilitating or managing time, managing pace, taking breaks, snacks, whatever other roles are really important within the context of that meeting that, that it's clearly distributed and people know what the role is.

Speaker B: Yeah, I like that for the day of as well. But I also like often inviting people into the co design of the day or co designing the meeting because other, because then you invite them into having ownership as well of the outcomes for the day if you've had a hand in contributing to the design. And so I wonder if there are pieces of the day that Monica needs to clearly own and can move forward and design for. If there are other pieces of the day that someone else on the team could actually take ownership and say hey, you've got half an hour to do to ground us and kick us off, you've got your half an hour to close things or after lunch activity or there's something that like parceling that out a little bit meets um, lots of needs on a team. It provides opportunity and empowerment and buy in and ownership and it also disburdens Monica from having to design and plan and deliver everything on a team. So I'd be curious about that opportunity around pace.

Speaker A: The one uh, role that we could take on as a leader or facilitator is just even naming. It's feeling like we're sidetracked. It's, it's feeling like this is happening, it's feeling like this conversation needs to go on and then checking in, you know, do we need a break or like not having to be the one that decides those things, but just naming the things you're not noticing or seeing

Speaker B: as the leader facilitator sounds like there's a tendency with these meetings previously to have more planned than time available or for the time to expand to just take up, you know. And so, you know, I'm guilty of this too. Too much content, too many things in a uh, in a meeting. So like actively eliminating things out of that and asking is this truly the most highest order thing we need to do with our time together and what can we actually do asynchronously or do it a separate meeting or do elsewhere and kind of actively, you know, I'm black shift facilitating tomorrow and we've got three and a half hours and we've planned two hours and 45 minutes worth because I know 100 that we're going to fill that time with other things or something's going to expand. And so just being really conscious of kind of creating enough spaciousness, um, so that the pace doesn't feel rushed or constrained, um, or people leave feeling incomplete. I think that's probably a risk is that there'll be some incomplete things and that leaves an open loop for people to of be frustrated by or by, you know, whatever. So, um, trying to close the. Close things in as much as you can in the day of.

Speaker A: Let's shift.

Speaker B: Let's let Monica speak again because we've just been pontificating about her meeting and what we think might be important. But uh, Monica, anything stand out or what stands out, um, from anything that Nick or I mentioned or didn't?

Speaker C: Uh, yeah. So so much. And I didn't even take notes. So I'm going to try to just pull things from my brain that stuck out. Um, yeah, so much. Great conversation though. So the first thing for me is like, I just like stuck out really strongly was that I need to simplify the meeting, the agenda. So what, what are the things that we absolutely have to get done? And I think kind of sticking to that, like even if it's just like one main thing in the morning and one main thing in the afternoon, I feel like I could maybe do that and then put a couple of activities or like within that and maybe share information about something or do something more fun like within those two. But have those two be like the kind of the uh, anchors for each half of the meeting. I think that would be helpful. And I really like the idea of like planning for like a shorter amount of time, knowing that we'll end up taking the full six hours or however long we have together. I think like, I love the intentional use of space. So I mean, I think we have breaks typically in meetings or you know, I could say like, oh yeah, go out and grab a coffee or something like that. But like maybe something more intentional, like let's go and do this outside or let's maybe I book a couple rooms in another building nearby where breakout groups could actually go and like leave the common space that we have and um, just having options in the space that we're all together. Whether it's like the little fidget stuff, food, uh, different places to sit, like kind of being more intentional about how I set up the spaces. Uh, would be what is a great suggestion. Um, the sharing of the power. It's so interesting. The power thing is so complicated for us because, um, yeah, the role that I have, like I kind of say in name it's power has power, but it's really, I Don't really have any power over people. And um, when you say senior, I don't think you're referring to my age, but, but I am older and been here probably the longest of our team. So I think there are perceptions of that, um, that I don't really. I don't like to think about or I don't like to address. I feel like I just like us to all be equal on a team working together. Right. But I think maybe if I paid more attention to some of those power dynamics, um, and planned in response to that, that that would be probably helpful.

Speaker A: That is actually a really common. That's a common thing I hear and actually something I've personally experienced as well, this. And it's maybe not exactly the same for you, Monica, but the, you know, the strong desire for us to all feel really equal and, and for that reason I don't really want to talk about my role or I don't want to address that. Yeah, I have been here for six years and you're brand new. Like, I kind of don't want to name the ways in which I have a form of power over other people on, on the teams that I've worked on. I've just noticed this like, because it comes from this place of a desire for us to all kind of be one and be equal. But that is a common thing that, that uh, that we kind of move to feel is really common in human services work and a nonprofit to, to want that intention and therefore maybe not always say the things that are ah, actually really going on. Like there is a. And you're right that you're complex in a university environment, like your power is very complex, but it, it is still a form that is there.

Speaker C: The other thing I was thinking about too is like, I like the idea of like starting with something whether like some form of design team alliance or something. But I was also thinking about like, maybe I know what I think would be make for a successful meeting. Like I could name or think about what those outcomes would be. Maybe sharing them with the team and asking them what would be success to them or like, what would make them feel like they left here and feeling like they contributed and it was valuable and time well spent. But again, I get into the place of like, oh, we don't have too much time. So I know this team could talk about that probably for like over an hour. And so I'm just trying to think about what kinds of things could I do that are kind of contained, for lack of a better word, before we get into the work, work and then, you know, still appreciating that people might want that or maybe would enjoy that.

Speaker A: Was there anything that you noticed you were resistant to as we were talking or just like, maybe didn't resonate?

Speaker C: Not really. Like, I just, I do think they're all great ideas. Um, like I think the shared roles, like having other people lead pieces. There are definitely people in our teams who also have different roles, roles that they could easily take over. And I've already thought that I would be planning the day with them. So that part really rang true for me too. There was nothing that really I didn't feel like was a great idea. I'm just trying to think of like, how am I gonna do all this?

Speaker B: It's the, I uh, sometimes think, what's the minimum lovable experience? Like what's the, you know, say MVP version of this thing? What's the minimum formal version of design team alliance to set us up as best we can? We don't need to do a full blown design team alliance. And it might be, hey, here's some patterns I've noticed on our meetings. Three of us spend a lot of time talking, six people spend a lot of time listening. I don't think we want to do that today. So how might we engage everyone? And just having a few prompts towards the most common patterns and you have to solve all the things, but just naming some of the things that you might be anxious about or uncertain of and um, inviting the team into a bit of co creation and just time boxing and saying, we've got 20 minutes. We're going to spend the first 20 minutes just doing this or post, um, grounding, um, not to make this an advice giving session but you know, constraining, constraining those things down a little bit and thinking what's the minimum version of it can be helpful because you're right. You could spend probably hours talking about things that may not actually make that difference or get us closer to the thing at the end of the day.

Speaker C: One thing that when I left because I went to your other workshop on designing, um, meetings and I left thinking like, there's no way I can do it all, like change everything like for the next meeting. Right. And so part of me is just also thinking, like, what small things maybe or like few things I guess could I do just to change the meeting a bit. And then the next time I'm going to do a meeting, I'll keep working at it, right? Like, I don't, I don't feel like I'm just going to like do a total 180 in this one meeting. But if I can just even make some improvements, I think I'll feel that was worth it, you know? Mhm.

Speaker A: And one thing I found myself curious about is, uh, if you could do a bit of a prototype of your plan as well. So you make that small. You make those small tweaks, you focus on what matters the most, what's the most important. And then either working on this collaboratively and. Or running it by. If you're, if you're collaboratively designing with someone else. Actually I still would then run it by a participant with a fresh mind. You know, walk them through the day, the intention of each, like, pull back the curtain. This is what we're hoping for, this section. This is what we want to achieve here. Walk them through the agenda and treat that as like a, uh, almost like a. Yeah, like a rough, rough draft prototype that you could get feedback on.

Speaker C: Yeah, that's a great suggestion. I'll def. I can definitely do that.

Speaker A: Giving like a few pieces of advice here. But as you debrief and kind of focus on what stood out, what you liked, what. What feels most meaningful. Now if you really constrain yourself and think about uh, like one or two steps that you can take, what's the most meaningful thing? What might you try or experiment with?

Speaker C: I think like, well, if I'm thinking to the six P's, like maybe purpose is probably like going to be for me, like the most important for this particular meeting and the one thing I definitely can do and just really clarifying the purpose or couple purposes. And then um, maybe the process would also be like, connected to that in terms of like, okay, this is the purpose and these are the outcomes I hope for. What are the processes that I can implement or have others help me implement or have others implement, um, that would help us reach those. Those are the two kind of P's that are ringing true like the loudest. Me.

Speaker B: Yeah, I think for the, for the process piece, again, this is just Jeff's unsolicited thinking around trying to avoid open dialogue, unstructured open dialogue wherever possible. You know, there's certainly time and place for it, but more often than not we're better off to do, you know, a bit of silent reflection and then pair up with your partner and talk it through and come out with a question that you have about this thing or small breakouts or intentional rounds or here's the question you're responding to and you've got 30 seconds to do that. I think lots of groups suffer. You know, the power dynamics start to really play themselves out when we have unstructured space. People will use their power to have their voice heard. And so I think that's a big piece of can we create those activities or those processes for people to have their voice heard and acknowledged and make a, make a contribution. I think that's probably what most people are looking for in that space is to have a meaningful, positive impact on, on the decision or the group, um, process, whatever that looks like. So m. Yeah, those two are pretty good Ps to focus on, I would say.

Speaker C: Thank you.

Speaker B: Okay, I think we're probably in final reflections. That's been about, um, the length of a podcast episode, which goes really fast when does through these things. And so, um, well, first of all, thank you, um, both for coming to the workshop a couple of weeks ago and for engaging in this experimental format here for the leaderful podcast where we take a real, kind of a real time, real world thing and break it down a little bit. And so I really appreciate you carving out the time to join Nick and I for that conversation. Nick, I always appreciate spending time and thinking with you in different spaces. So, so thanks also for carving out the time and calling it. Um, yeah, any, any parting words for our listeners. Um, Nick, maybe over to you and then Monica will give you the, give you the last word.

Speaker A: Yeah, I mean I'm really appreciating um, both of you today in this open conversation. Monica, for coming and bringing this real topic. It, it feels vulnerable to open, open a meeting that you open up any layer of responsibility that, that you have and, and yeah, to put it out there and get, hear us talk about it and then come back on. And thanks for trying this, this form format. Um, I was really delighted by kind of the flow of things. Yeah. And thank you Jeff as well for co creating this and bouncing ideas back and forth. I think there's lots that's still ringing for me. I think there's so many possible takeaways from your situation, Monica, and I think it's, it's very applicable to many, many, many environments. The context is going to be a little bit different based on the environment that you find yourself in, but everywhere where we gather and do things together as humans, like there's so much of what you talked about today and what we explored that applies to any system where human beings organize. Um, so, yeah, just really thankful for this conversation because I think it translates very well to lots of environments.

Speaker C: Yeah. And thanks for inviting me because like, I've found this so helpful and so there's so many things to think about. As I left the workshop also, I was feeling the same way. But like I said, I'll just keep working at it. And I think, you know, maybe it seems like, why would you have to put so much work into a meeting, but it's just so, it's so dynamic and so much can happen there. Um, as a team, the work that you're trying to get across accomplish, like they are just so important. Like I could continue to work on this for years, I think, and just, you know, try to master that. That would be amazing. So yeah, I think, ah, yeah, it's been a great opportunity. So thank you.

Speaker B: Leaderful is brought to you by the Ally co, a team of human centered systems conscious consultants, coaches and facilitators dedicated to helping you and your team tackle the core problems of burnout and stuckness and misalignment and misuses of power and all of the things that get in the way of creating truly human centered workplaces where everyone thrives and does their best work. Head over to www.theallico.world to learn more.