How do I point out these long work meetings aren't working?

July 28, 2013 12:20 AM

On most days at work, I have three hour long meetings with a coworker. The vast majority of the time is spent watching her document every single change she makes to the system, and watching her compose emails. Both these tasks and the actual 'work'- changes to a system- could easily be done by one person. In fact, they are done by one person- the rest of us (around 3 or 4 people) just sit and watch. Sometimes she lets someone else use the keyboard, but she tells them exactly what to do.

She is a very nice woman but I feel we are wasting an incredible amount of time. I'm bored out of my mind. I know others are too, due to comments I've heard and the fact that one coworker has trouble not falling asleep. I'm not doing anything remotely productive and I very rarely learn anything. We are running very behind on the work that needs to be done.

There is a very small amount of actual team discussion that occurs that is quite useful.

Is there any way I can tactfully point out that these meetings are ineffective? I have only been in this job six months. I really don't want to step on anyone's toes and make myself unpopular. I enjoy the rest of my role.

posted by anonymous to Work & Money (23 answers total)

Could you elaborate on the work relationship between you, this woman, and the other people in the room? Like is she your immediate boss? Ultimate boss? Manager? Peer? Who are the other people? Who decides these meetings will happen? Some more details would help.
posted by DarlingBri at 12:29 AM on July 28, 2013

Is this coworker a manager in some capacity? That seems like a weird system, and like something I'd speak to a manager about so they could reallocate the resources to be used more productively. Or ask a manager to attend this meeting every day for a week to see if they can draw conclusions on their own and deal with it entirely.

If that's not an option, then maybe setting an agenda with explicit goals for each person would be a low-conflict way of approaching this.
posted by guster4lovers at 12:29 AM on July 28, 2013 [1 favorite]

As you said, she is your co-worker. That means, break out of this spell. Decline the very next madness of a 'meeting,' and go do the work that's falling behind.
posted by Kruger5 at 12:57 AM on July 28, 2013

What is the meeting supposed to achieve? I'm struggling to understand the context - does she need witnesses to observe the changes?
posted by freya_lamb at 2:45 AM on July 28, 2013 [2 favorites]

Dude, flag it out with your manager that it's a waste of time and resource, and get your bored colleagues to flag it with their managers.

And stop going. Tell your manager it's a waste of your time, and why. Better yet, tell your manager you won't be able to get X or Y done by date Z because of the meeting, do you have permission to work instead?
posted by smoke at 2:49 AM on July 28, 2013 [5 favorites]

Is there a way you can get rid of the meeting under the banner of greater efficiency, but do it in partnership with her so she sees it as less threatening? Depending on your relationship you could talk to her and say that not everyone's time is being used well by having them sit in the room for that much time, and that instead you could try having everyone make themselves available for emergency contact during that period so they can come in as required.

There's not really enough context to know from your question, but usually in my experience when someone wants to do write documents and make changes and so on in front of others, it's because they want to cover themselves in case of future problems. If that's the case, you might be able to develop a process where your coworker does everything by herself, and then everyone else signs off on it later by email or whatever (so there is a paper trail).
posted by StephenF at 3:31 AM on July 28, 2013 [3 favorites]

I'd just bail. Send an email prior, "I'm up to my ass in alligators with the Obelisk project, I'll catch you next time."

Then, just keep sending regrets.

If you can, discuss with supervisor, even better have your supervisor sit in. THAT should kill this time suck easily enough.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 4:19 AM on July 28, 2013 [1 favorite]

Talk to your manager. If you're spending three hours a day sitting quietly watching somebody else type, your manager will want to so something about that. Especially if it's causing you to fall behind on other work.

(The obvious solution will be to set a time limit on the meeting so you can have the small amount of discussion that is actually needed; then the time waster can go off and do her changing and documenting on her own. But leave that up to your manager to enforce, this is one of the benefits of having a manager.)
posted by ook at 4:46 AM on July 28, 2013 [4 favorites]

We are running very behind on the work that needs to be done.

Does your group/dept have a shared calendar? Be sure you have all those meetings on it so it clearly shows how much time is being spent, and then sit down w/your boss w/your project list & calendar in front of you & ask him/her to help you use your time better. Don't say the meetings are a waste. Say that you don't have much to contribute nor are your projects benefiting from your participation and that your time would be better spent moving other projects forward while being available to the group via phone/email. Your boss will be more likely to back you up on this change if your alternative suggestion has tangible/immediate benefits for the company.
posted by headnsouth at 5:15 AM on July 28, 2013 [1 favorite]

What purpose, exactly, are these meetings supposed to serve? It sounds very bizarre to have a group of people sitting around for three hours watching another person keyboarding. Is what she is doing something you actually need to witness?
posted by Thorzdad at 5:30 AM on July 28, 2013 [8 favorites]

If you can't get rid of the meetings, can you do other work during the meetings? Like, while she's composing an email, can you process simple emails of your own?
posted by mskyle at 6:25 AM on July 28, 2013 [2 favorites]

Despite what you say about them being nice, this meeting is a power-trip for your coworker: they're tying up members of several teams for hours a day! They're pretending to be a manager. So they might be being nice, but they're not being kind.

Talk with your manager, explain that the team discussion part is useful, but the hours of sitting around aren't. Request an agenda. If a meeting can't be summarized in the single sentence "The purpose of this meeting is to …", it needs to be rethought.

If you're felling really brave, invite your manager along to one of the meetings. It may sour the relationship with your coworker for a bit, but it will be the first of a series of much shorter, much more focused meetings.
posted by scruss at 6:29 AM on July 28, 2013 [2 favorites]

Email, cc your manager:

"Sorry, coworker, I'm unable to attend these standing meetings anymore - my own plate is full and it looks like you have everything under control anyway!

Let's catch up for a half-hour on Fridays so you can let me know what changes have been made to the system. I have 2:30 and 4:00 available."
posted by kimberussell at 7:40 AM on July 28, 2013 [2 favorites]

I'd just stop going to the meetings. If someone got mad about that, I'd point out the uselessness of the meetings then.
posted by tylerkaraszewski at 8:31 AM on July 28, 2013

What is the purpose of watching her type for 3 hours? Is she not trusted to do her job without babysitters?

I don't think I'd just immediately drop out of meetings, especially since it sounds like you are the newbie here. I think I'd talk to your supervisor first about this to see if your attendance is really, really considered necessary at this job.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:09 AM on July 28, 2013

Wow, hearing you describe those meetings reminds me of "group work" in high school and college, where four people are supposed to meet at a specific time to work on something but everyone just ends up watching one person do all the work. I'm echoing everyone else in just not going to the meetings anymore. Say you're working on your own stuff but you're available to help if they need you for something. Some rules are meant to be broken.
posted by pravit at 12:21 PM on July 28, 2013 [1 favorite]

A three hour meeting on most days? That's insane. Meetings should have a purpose. Is there an agenda or are you just expected to turn up for some undefined reason? If there isn't an agenda I would ask for one.

If it's impeding your ability to get your actual work done, I think you have a case to take to your supervisor. You could tell them that while the group discussion is very useful, your co-worker can accomplish all the desktop work without needing your input, and you feel your time would be more productively spent on Tasks A, B and C which you feel are a higher priority.
posted by andraste at 4:53 PM on July 28, 2013

What is the claimed/intended purpose of these meetings? I can't tell from your question, and for sure you need to understand that (and her view) in good faith before you can address this tactfully.
posted by J. Wilson at 5:14 PM on July 28, 2013

There are a ton of articles like this on the internet, and plenty of lists like this one. You probably don't need convincing yourself that these really aren't even meetings per se, but if you have to step up into gear to prove that productivity is being sacrificed, you have plenty of resources out there not only on how to have productive meetings, but why excessive meetings destroy productivity beyond the simple time wasting that occurs during the meeting.

Beneath all of the corporatespeak and common sense, a common theme emerges: most three-hour meetings aren't meetings, and routine, long meetings without an agenda are a complete waste of time. And then there's the hidden little secret that people who call or enjoy long meetings are usually enjoying some combination of time wasting, making themselves look productive and authoritative (usually with social issues preventing them from seeing how this really looks), and sometimes even the socialization factor comes in, where the meetings are essentially "let's all be together" time.

I agree with others that initially you just start off by knowing that you have better things to know, knowing what they are, and making sure your manager knows that you'll have trouble getting those things done if you have to go to every meeting. But deal with it meeting-by-meeting, and without your manager when possible -- "is this meeting mandatory? Are you sure? Is there anything I should be preparing for the meeting?" Only when you've tried to wiggle out with simple confrontation with reality ("you're making me go to this for a reason, right?") do you need to involve your manager, and how quickly you escalate depends on things. You can start out with just asking her the same questions -- "so and so says I need to go to this meeting, but I think I should be working on X. Do you agree?"

What I've learned in the workplace is to deal with these things piece by piece, individually, rather than pointing out big systemic problems dramatically when you can't take them any longer. That always has the effect of making you look a little younger, more off-the-cuff, impulsive, etc, and it's sort of kept me back until I recently started handling things in this bite-sized way.
posted by lordaych at 9:15 PM on July 28, 2013 [3 favorites]

I should clarify -- "is my presence at this meeting mandatory" rather than "is this mandatory." If the reason is weak, you have comebacks (depending on context) like "oh, I think everybody knows exactly how I feel about that one :)" or "actually my presence might be a hindrance; rather than running things by me this time, come up with exactly what you envision and I'll look at the big picture." The second one is good for things like being a key player who gets invited to everything, yet works really well with a simple gameplan and is invited to everything because they get things done, which is often because they don't mess around with excessive meetings and circular conversations :)
posted by lordaych at 9:19 PM on July 28, 2013

Also, sometimes a three-hour "group work" or "workout" or "brainstorming session" gets mislabeled as a meeting (though for the last one three hours would almost always be excessive unless THE. ASTEROID. IS COMING. NOW.) when it's really intended to be a marshaling of resources and teamwork.

Looking at it charitably, if that's what's going on, they still aren't productive, and need to be framed properly and everyone needs to be involved. If they're necessary, the fastest way to find out is to cut back on them and find out who needs the constant touching-of-base and running-things-by-you, but my best work tends to be solitary and I know what it's liked to be sucked into "group work" that really consists of not-giving a shit while others show off, or giving-a-shit and getting frustrated that no one else does. Managers should always be concerned about time-wasting, so you could always ask them to help "provide more structure" for these interactions and ask them non-sarcastic questions along the way to help them better engage with what should be an obvious blip on their radar screen (near-daily-three-hour-meetings!?).
posted by lordaych at 9:24 PM on July 28, 2013 [1 favorite]

What did your manager say? Seriously, talk to your manager, this should be his/her problem to solve.

Just trying to get other work done during the meeting sounds like a terrible idea, that's not going to work out well.
posted by ook at 8:07 AM on July 31, 2013 [2 favorites]

When you say, "it didn't work," what do you mean? Did your manager, or someone else who has the power to punish or fire you, tell you that you have to go?

As for, "it might look rude," is there anyone who has the power to fire you who is in these meetings to whom you worry that you're being rude?

Basically, one of two things is going on here. In the first scenario, someone who has the power to punish or fire you is in these meetings and tells you that you have to go. In that case, I think you need to accept that going to these meetings, even though it seems pointless to you, is your job, and you need to decide whether you want to stay in this job or find a new job that does not have such requirements.

The second possibility is that no one who has the power to punish or fire you has told you that you are required to spend three hours a day watching your coworker work. In that case, you need to say no to these meetings. If your coworker wants you in the meetings, tell her that you'll be happy to meet with her and your manager so that she can explain why she wants you to attend the meetings, and you can explain why your actual work takes priority, and your manager can decide whether to order you to go to the meetings.

But, bottom line, until someone who has the power to fire you, and who has full understanding of what goes on in these meetings, orders you to go, then you should prioritize your actual work and do that. If your coworker is upset about that, she can take it up with the manager. But if she's not your boss, and she doesn't have the power to fire you, you shouldn't listen to her when she tells you to do things that are bad for the company and that interfere with you doing your actual job.
posted by decathecting at 5:26 PM on August 3, 2013