Great tips, Wes. #3 is particularly powerful – it subtly incentivizes everyone to stay on track. Like a teacher's class-wide consequence, it creates peer pressure for staying focused on solving the problem at hand. Have you found this technique works better in certain types of meetings?
I agree. Redirecting and stating the opportunity cost of not doing so is respectful because attendees would probably view the redirect as dismissive of ideas, and question the reason for not going to the end of the proverbial rabbit hole, even though most wouldn't verbalize.
One thing that’s missing here is that the precursor to all of this is to clearly state the agenda and expected outcomes of the meeting ahead of time. Makes it much easier to blame the agenda when getting things back on track.
Great read! I've been using a variant of "good point, thanks! Let's park that for now" for a while and it works really well. I'm happy to pin your other advices in my notea system, it will surely be helpful 👍
Omg you took me down memory lane with all 3, I've had my share of meetings with people that, on #1, love to go on tangents and jumping into rabbit holes. I love your recommendation to use the name of someone else in the meeting to bring things back on track.
On #2, I've also had my fair share of those that jump into the weeds so quickly, going into details that are not aligned or needed at this point.
something I've done here to redirect back is along the lines of "those are great ideas, or that's great tech/tool/etc., let's figure the main concept first and then we can see where we could use them".
On #3 the use of 'because' is gold. Plus getting their skin in the game with the time/cost variable is what I have to remember to use next time.
P.S. What about the people that want to jump ahead on the content all the time?
Great tips, Wes. #3 is particularly powerful – it subtly incentivizes everyone to stay on track. Like a teacher's class-wide consequence, it creates peer pressure for staying focused on solving the problem at hand. Have you found this technique works better in certain types of meetings?
I agree. Redirecting and stating the opportunity cost of not doing so is respectful because attendees would probably view the redirect as dismissive of ideas, and question the reason for not going to the end of the proverbial rabbit hole, even though most wouldn't verbalize.
One thing that’s missing here is that the precursor to all of this is to clearly state the agenda and expected outcomes of the meeting ahead of time. Makes it much easier to blame the agenda when getting things back on track.
I have seen your like in my page. I just want to use this opportunity to thank you for everything. And you are free to message me private
This was really enlightening for me. I enjoyed reading this. Point 1&2 stuvh with me. Thank you for sharing
Great read! I've been using a variant of "good point, thanks! Let's park that for now" for a while and it works really well. I'm happy to pin your other advices in my notea system, it will surely be helpful 👍
Omg you took me down memory lane with all 3, I've had my share of meetings with people that, on #1, love to go on tangents and jumping into rabbit holes. I love your recommendation to use the name of someone else in the meeting to bring things back on track.
On #2, I've also had my fair share of those that jump into the weeds so quickly, going into details that are not aligned or needed at this point.
something I've done here to redirect back is along the lines of "those are great ideas, or that's great tech/tool/etc., let's figure the main concept first and then we can see where we could use them".
On #3 the use of 'because' is gold. Plus getting their skin in the game with the time/cost variable is what I have to remember to use next time.
P.S. What about the people that want to jump ahead on the content all the time?
Any ideas for these cases?
Thanks Wes.