Tebe.blog

Meetings are an integral part of work, although everyone complains about them. Microsoft research shows that we spend most of our working time in meetings. It’s where creative processes, development, and management decisions are made, things are explained, and relationships and teams are built.

Meetings are costs; people’s time is a resource that companies pay for. It’s the largest expense they don’t track. However, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Add to this the wasted energy of demotivated participants after the meeting and the cost of wrong decisions.

Meetings won’t get better thanks to guidelines from handbooks and training sessions; these haven’t worked. First, we need to recognize that they are part of the job and establish that managers are responsible for their productivity. It’s best to start fixing necessary regular meetings. Control and reduce the rest.

Here are several practices that will help improve the effectiveness of meetings in any company:

Social Behaviors

Meetings require social skills that don’t come naturally. People tend to prolong their statements, digress from the topic, and focus on their own ideas. This reduces the effectiveness of meetings.

One way to counteract this is the two-minute rule for each statement. It teaches conciseness and forces preparation. Practicing active listening and constructive speaking is also crucial.

Productive participation in a meeting requires practice and conscious effort. Trust within the team allows members to openly share ideas and accept criticism. That’s why it’s worth starting with groups where people already trust each other.

Time Limitation

Meetings should always start and end on time. Delays and prolonging discussions undermine principles and respect for others’ time. Time frames motivate focus on the most important issues. Adhering to them builds a culture of efficiency and accountability.

Material Standardization

Instead of traditional presentations, it’s worth dedicating the beginning of the meeting to silent reading of prepared documents. This method, used in Amazon among others, leads to more productive discussions. It eliminates the problem of superficial presentations and focuses attention on the essence.

Introducing standard formats and templates for presentations and reports saves time on preparation and data interpretation. When everyone knows the document structure, they focus on content, not form. It’s easier to compare information between teams and periods.

Discussion Structure

Effective meetings require good discussion. At the beginning, the problem or question should be precisely defined so that everyone is talking about the same thing. Then, solutions are sought, considering at least two possibilities besides the „do nothing” option. Only after selection do we move to action planning.

It’s crucial that all participants are in the same phase of discussion simultaneously. Jumping between phases leads to chaos and inefficiency. This structure needs to be practiced and refined to become a natural element of organizational culture.

This is difficult because problem-solving never wants to proceed linearly. That’s why it’s sometimes necessary to reach for group methods of working on topics – for example, using boards, collaborative work, and independent brainstorming.

Decisions in Notes

In common practice, „minutes” are used for meeting arrangements. These are detailed records of conversations, often containing unnecessary details and irrelevant statements. Instead, it’s worth recording only key decisions.

When a decision requires action, a clear record is needed: who does what and by when. This micro-format even has an acronym – WWW (Who, does What, by When).

Always stop when ending a discussion block. That’s when a decision is made, not at the end of the meeting. By recording them on an ongoing basis, the note can be sent within an hour after the meeting. It’s also worth giving participants a chance to straighten out arrangements, especially those that concern them.

Consistency

At the beginning of each meeting, it’s worth returning to previously made decisions. This approach ensures work continuity and accountability for commitments made. For decisions to have power, it must be clear that they won’t be lost.

Continuous Improvement

A short round of opinions at the end of each meeting, where participants say in a maximum of two minutes what was good and what could be improved, helps in their continuous enhancement. It also engages team members and builds a sense of influence on the quality of joint work.

The key is consistent application of these methods and regular evaluation of their effectiveness.

In the world of product metrics, it’s important to measure outcomes, not just outputs. When we talk about users, outcomes refer to changes in behavior. However many companies still rely on Net Promoter Score (NPS) as the primary metric to measure customer satisfaction.

NPS was introduced in a 2003 Harvard Business Review article “The One Number You Need to Grow.”  

The Bain & Co. consultant who wrote the article called NPS the “simplest, most intuitive and best predictor of customer behavior” and a “useful predictor of growth.”

The metric has since become a ubiquitous tool for measuring customer satisfaction, with many companies using it as a target for executive compensation. However, the metric has been criticized for being proprietary, problematic, and often misunderstood.

According to a 2019 Wall Street Journal article, NPS is often misused by companies as a target for executive compensation. The Bain & Co. consultant who wrote the original article even admitted that he had „no idea how people would mess with the score to bend it, to make it serve their selfish objectives.”

Additionally, research on NPS has produced contradictory results. One study found that „satisfaction” and „liking” were better predictors of recommendations than „likelihood to recommend.” MeasuringU compiled research on NPS and found that while the metric often correlates with satisfaction, it is not always a good predictor of future growth.

Therefore, it’s important for companies to learn more about NPS and never use it as the only metric to measure customer satisfaction. While NPS can be useful in understanding customer behavior, it is not a panacea for all product metrics. Companies should use multiple metrics to gain a more holistic understanding of their customers and make data-driven decisions.

In conclusion, NPS has played an important role in bringing customer satisfaction to the forefront of business discussions. However, companies should not rely on it as the sole metric to measure success. By understanding the limitations of NPS and using a combination of metrics, companies can gain a more nuanced understanding of their customers and improve their products and services accordingly.

OKR, or Objectives and Key Results, is a management method developed at Intel, adapted and promoted by Google, and used by organizations of all sizes worldwide.It is a simplified version of management by objectives (MBO).

Its most important components are the format of priorities, the process of setting them up, and the monitoring of their progress. Implementing OKR can have a significant impact on a company’s ability to execute its strategy.

OKRs allow companies:
– Set and communicate priorities,
– Reduce the number of priorities,
– Align actions: ensure that all teams are working towards the same goals,
– Monitor progress and identify areas where additional effort may be needed,
– Clarify responsibilities.

OKRs help to ensure focus and collaboration, provide transparency and establish clear rules for operation. This usually leads to increased employee engagement and allows for a focus on delivering value to customers and the company.

OKRs are most effective in product development, but can also help with running any business. When implementing the method, you can stop at the level of the company by setting and communicating its objectives. OKRs are most commonly implemented for the company and teams. Individual OKRs should not be used, and OKR goals should not be linked to performance management processes.

The format of priorities

The goal in the OKR describes a priority for an organization or a team. Its format consists of two elements:

A qualitative Objective. A clear, specific, and memorable statement that describes the intended outcome. Since its purpose is to provide direction and maintain focus, it ought to be simple to comprehend.

The Key Results. A few points whose verification will show if the goal has been met. They should be quantifiable. The measurement must be independent of, say, manager evaluations. They should be chosen so that progress can be tracked and measurements can be carried out during the OKR period.

Example OKR for a company:

Launch successful international expansion
Generate at least 50 requests for offers from target markets per quarter
Sign at least 15 letters of intent with prospective clients
Sign at least 5 agreements with foreign clients
Achieve a minimum of $100,000 in new international revenue monthly

The goal in OKR format describes one challenge with a clear Objective and three to five Key Results. The organization should have no more than 5 goals for any given year. They should consider various aspects of the business (product development, marketing, employee competency development, and process improvement). On the team level it is best to set one OKR per quarter – only then can you say it is a priority.

Objectives and Key Results for teams

Companies using OKR set, align and monitor priorities for the whole business and teams. There are no individual-level OKRs since the most important role for the employees is to be part of a team.

The most often used cadence is a year for company OKRs and a quarter on a team’s level. This may vary depending on the business and the maturity of the organization. Having the same rhythm is crucial since it enables alignment and coordination.

Typical steps when determining OKR for the coming quarter.
1. The vision and strategy of company is known
2. Management sets and communicates company OKRs for a year
3. Teams determine and align their priorities
4. Evaluation of goals and retrospective of the previous period

During the alignment phase, literally every manager and leader has work to do. A disciplined approach helps with regular evaluation of results. The whole company gains knowledge about the progress and priorities. When done regularly, the quality of discussions here keeps improving.

Why should the retrospective come after the new objectives are set? It may seem contradictory, but it makes it easier to start the quarter with new goals. Conversations about them are not anchored in current numbers, and it is easier to talk about ambitious goals. On the other hand, the retrospectives should not be done under time pressure.

Organizations should strive to enter every new period with all goals set. It is one way of ensuring discipline in the process. 

Nowadays companies struggle to improve their strategy execution. How do we know what are the main problems in this field? Let’s take a look at some sources: large-scale surveys with corporate executives and managers.

First The Economist Intelligence Unit study from 2004. The EIU conducts periodic research on the subject. In 2004 they surveyed 276 executives in the US and Canada. Only 43% rated their companies as successful at executing strategic initiatives. The most important issue to improve: communication from senior management.

In „Secrets to successful strategy execution” published by HBR in 2008 consultants from Booz & Company share results from their 5 years long research (1000 organizations). Three out of five companies when asked if “Important strategic and operational decisions are quickly translated into action” the answer was no. Again similar results:  information and decision rights are crucial to successful execution.

Wharton–Gartner Survey described by Professor Lawrence G. Hrebiniak in „Obstacles to Effective Strategy Implementation” paper (2006). He wrote: „I undertook an empirical study of implementation issues in which data were collected from 443 managers involved in strategy execution”. Key obstacles: poor change management, vague strategy and poor information sharing.