[Noisebridge-discuss] Meeting Optimization

[nils at shkoo.com]

Hi,

The last couple Tuesday night meetings we've had have both run a little 
long, and we've gotten stuck on some items.  I have some ideas as to how 
we might help optimize the meeting process so it doesn't get dragged out 
quite so much:

1. Separate out the agenda into "announcements" and "discussion items".
    Do the announcements first, and attempt to postpone any items requiring
    consensus to at least after the announcements.  This way we can optmize
    the group excitement for cool things that are happening before we get
    bogged down with discussion.

    There are certain items that might include both an "announcement" and a
    "discussion" component.  I would say that it's fine to separate these
    components.  For instance, we could announce "we got this cool
    equipment in; later in the meeting we will discuss what to do with it."

2. On the meeting agenda, for each item (either an annoucement or
    discussion item), request that there be a responsible party listed.
    This person will either make the announcement, or present the issue
    that requires discussion.  Whoever's running the meeting has the option
    of skipping agenda items that do not have a presenter, or where the
    presenter is absent.

    If you have an item that you need to present at a meeting but you can't
    make it in person, it is perfectly acceptable for you to present
    vicariously through another.

3. Have a generally accepted maximum time, say 15 minutes, that we try to
    stick to when discussing any one item.  (And maybe encourage the
    movement of an announcement to the discussion section of the agenda if
    time spent on the announcement runs over 5 minutes).  If the discussion
    runs over, we could encourage the discussion particpants to use the
    following procudure:

    a. Identify the participants of the discussion who have the most zeal
       regarding the issue.

    b. Have one of the zealous participants volunteer to be the responsible
       party for the issue.

    c. This responsible party will be responsible for coordinating a
       consensus among the zealous participants.  The responsible party
       should not do this as part of the general meeting, but instead
       coordinate with the zealous participants directly to arrange a time
       and/or method for additional discussion.

    d. Once the zealous participants have reached consensus
       among themselves, the responsible party can present their new
       recommendation at the next Tuesday meeting.

    We should also recognize that it is non-excellent to raise significant
    objections to a general consensus, and then to not make an effort to
    participate in the outside-of-Tuesday-meeting council of zealous
    persons.

4. I've also heard a bit of minor grumbling that a small number of people
    keep getting stuck with running the meeting, so I think we should
    encourage a broader volunteer effort for this duty.  (I'll certainly
    volunteer to run the meeting on the 21st)

    One way to deal with this might be to have new members be encouraged to
    run a meeting before they become members.  That would have the
    following benefits:

      a. The new member would have to have attend enough meetings that they
         understand how the social dynamics of our group work well enough
         to run one.

      b. The new member would have more visibility to existing members
         whom they might not otherwise have a reason to interact with.

      c. The existing members will feel warm and fuzzy feelings towards the
         new member for performing this onerous task.

    I figure maybe it could be like the beer: You're not required to run a
    meeting to become a member, but we sure would love you if you did.

    Perhaps also we could ask for volunteers to run next week's meeting
    during the previous week's meeting so we don't have to play
    who-gets-impatient-first every week?

5. Try to discourage non-meeting-related chatter in the space during the
    meeting (or at least encourage it to be low volume), since it distracts
    from the goal of finishing the meeting and makes it difficult to hear
    what's going on.  If we optimize the meeting such that it fits within
    more people's attention spans, I think this would be a lot easier to
    do.

Would any or all of this help?  What do other people think?

Unfortunately I won't be able to make next tuesday's meeting, but I'll be 
there on the 21st.  But if anyone else would like to present these or 
other meeting optimization ideas on the 14th, feel free!

-nils