Tag

Management Archives - How to be Awesome at Your Job

1156: How to Make Great Meetings that Stop Wasting Time with Rebecca Hinds

By | Podcasts | No Comments

Rebecca Hinds discusses the simple shifts that turn meetings from time-wasters into value-generators.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why most meetings don’t feel like “real work”
  2. Why every organization needs a “meeting doomsday”
  3. The easy agenda fixes that save so much time

About Rebecca

Rebecca Hinds is a leading expert on organizational behavior and the future of work. She holds a BS, MS, and PhD from Stanford University. Rebecca founded the Work Innovation Lab at Asana and the Work AI Institute at Glean, first-of-their-kind corporate think tanks dedicated to conducting cutting-edge research on the future of work.

She is a trusted advisor to companies navigating the challenges of modern work—from meeting overload and hybrid dysfunction to the messy realities of AI adoption and organizational change.

Resources Mentioned

Thank you, Sponsors!

Rebecca Hinds Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Rebecca, welcome!

Rebecca Hinds
Thank you so much for having me, Pete. I’m looking forward to chatting.

Pete Mockaitis
Me, too. Me, too. And I am excited about making meetings fantastic. Could you share with us perhaps one of your most surprising, fascinating, counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made while you’re putting together Your Best Meeting Ever?

Rebecca Hinds
I’ve long been fascinated by this phenomenon that’s called the Babble Hypothesis. Research shows that, when people talk more, talk more in a meeting, outside of a meeting as well, we perceive them to be a leader more than they are regardless of what they’re saying.

And I think, you know, so much of our meetings are performative, they’re skewed by status dynamics and power dynamics within the organization, and I think this Babble Hypothesis really speaks to the fact that we need to be much more intentional about how we show up to meetings because talking, hogging the airtime isn’t just annoying. It isn’t just frustrating. It actually skews our perception of the people in the room.

Pete Mockaitis
That is so fascinating and, boy, you’re bringing back memories of high school. I remember Robbie Klaver – shoutout to Robbie, wherever he is – told me, I was starting up a Model United Nations chapter at my high school.

And he said, “If you want to win awards, all you have to do is talk a lot.” It was like, “That’s it. It doesn’t have to be good, it doesn’t have to be insightful, it doesn’t have to be helpful. Just get in front of that microphone a lot, and that’s how you get awards.”

And it’s like, “Robbie, surely not.” But, no, it really was exactly what I witnessed. And, whatever that had implications for, I guess, people’s college applications and all that. But this high school Model UN principle rings true decades later in workplaces all over the world.

Rebecca Hinds
As does so many other things, so many aspects of high school, you know, the homogeneous people coming together and sticking together, birds of a feather and, you know, jargon, too. We’re often told to use fancy words.

I talk in the book about how that’s often counterproductive because using jargon, using big words, using technical words, as I often see in meetings, it alienates other people, and we actually trust them less because they’re not speaking our language and they’re less relatable.

And I think that the science behind all of this is incredibly fascinating, in part, because it’s incredibly human. And probably what happened in high school is still showing up in some way, shape, or form in our meetings as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, thinking about high school jargon, if I may attempt, as I’m 41 years old, jargon-maxing is not good, but talk-maxing is good from your perception as being a leader, and wise, and all those things, but it’s not great from the meeting experience or the outcomes.

Rebecca Hinds
And I think maxing is such an interesting word. We’re seeing it everywhere now, certainly with token-maxing and more is better. My colleague and mentor at Stanford, Bob Sutton, will call this addition sickness, right?

We are hardwired as humans to solve problems through addition. We have a problem, we throw more money at it, we throw more people at it, we throw more meetings at it, we throw more people in the meetings, more meeting minutes, and it’s very dangerous because, often, we don’t take time to subtract.

And there’s also a great research from my colleague, Leidy Klotz at University of Virginia that shows, “If you do prime people to subtract, it dislodges that addition sickness and they start to adopt a subtraction mindset.”

It’s often not that we dislike subtraction. It’s often, it doesn’t even occur to us as an option. It doesn’t even occur to us that, as we add another person to the meeting, what we should probably think about, “Is there someone we can remove where the meeting is no longer relevant to them or as relevant as it once was?”

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’d love to get your take for this notion of the person who speaks more is perceived as the leader more. Are there any compelling studies or experiments or data points to highlight just how substantial an effect this is?

Rebecca Hinds
Interesting. So I think that the study that I anchor, and in the book, I believe it was for every 34 seconds of talk time on that order, people gained an extra point as a leader.

Now this was done in a context where there was no natural leader in the meeting in terms of having a bigger title than anyone else. But it skewed the perception in the room. And what’s also fascinating is, in this particular study, and there have been other studies where they didn’t find this effect, but in this study in particular, men automatically earned an extra point for being a leader, just for being male.

And I think that’s also a key part of the power dynamics is, you know, the gender, the diversity in the room, how quickly you speak as well. If you speak more quickly, in general, you’re perceived to be more competent.

And a lot of these cues, and we’re seeing it with AI as well right now, you know, depending on the way an AI tool is framing the output, how sycophantic it is, we also know that if people agree with us, we tend to view them as more intelligent and more capable. And all of these biases, you know, they are front and center in meetings and something that we need to pay very close attention to.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, these are tantalizing tidbits. But maybe we should zoom out and say, what’s your big idea, main message, key thesis of Your Best Meeting Ever?

Rebecca Hinds
So the big idea is meetings are a product. Meetings are the most important product in our entire organization. They’re where decisions get made, culture gets built, alignment gets set, and yet they’re also the least optimized. They’re the least optimized product in our entire organization.

And when we think about great products, great everyday products, well, they have certain product design principles. We should be applying those same product design principles to meetings. So the seven chapters of the book each walk through a product design principle applied to our meetings.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so when you say product, I can read that word in multiple ways. Like, a product might be a physical item that I can purchase at a store. Or, in the tech world, products are not so much physical. They’re software things with features and experiences and a user interface. So how are you using the word product here?

Rebecca Hinds
In a few different ways and with a few different dimensions. Meetings are a communication tool. They’re a communication and coordination and collaboration mechanism within our organization. So they’re intangible in that way.

But what I’m getting at with the idea of product is intentionality. Just as we would think very carefully about how we build products and services for our customers, well, we need to approach meetings with the same discipline.

We would never launch a product to our customers without design, feedback, refinement, iteration. We do that with meetings every single day. We throw them on the calendar and they’re often our default reaction to any sort of uncertainty or ambiguity within the organization.

We don’t treat them like a product we would sell or give to our customers, which, in the context of meetings, those are the attendees in the room. They are not ourselves as organizers of the meeting.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So the product is something that needs to be thoughtfully, carefully considered and not just knee-jerk default, “Here’s meeting,” and to put some upfront effort into crafting how that’s going to be effective. Can you share with us some additional implications of the product mindset toward meetings?

Rebecca Hinds
Countless. You know, countless implications in terms of employee engagement. We know that meeting effectiveness is a strong predictor of employee engagement within the organization, even controlling for the factors that you would think to be important, your manager, your role within the organization.

Real business results, right? I think I often work with organizations where you’ll go in and you’ll start to hear people talk about meetings as if they’re not the real work, you know, “Oh, I have to get through all these meetings and then I can finally get to my work,” right?

If we design meetings correctly, they should be the real work, right? They should move work forward. So often, it’s not the case because they’re used performatively. They’re used as a box-checking exercise and not a mechanism, not a product that moves our work forward.

And so key business results, you know, moving work forward, better engagement, better cooperation, better relationships between the manager and the direct report, you know, meetings are the most common form of collaboration within our organizations.

As knowledge workers, as desk workers, we spend 90% of our time collaborating. There is nothing that we can do as leaders within organizations that is more impactful in boosting collaboration, improving that 90% of time than meetings because they’re so ubiquitous, they’re so common, and they’re so dysfunctional.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, well said. So I like that notion of box-checking versus moving the work forward. And, boy, that’s a really good, bright line of distinction associated with, “Is the meeting real work or is it not?” You’re thinking about effectiveness on these dimensions over the relationship, as well as moving work forward.

Can you give us some more clarity on how I can assess, “Is this meeting amazing, terrible, okay, pretty good?” How do I get a gauge on how effective or ineffective a meeting is?

Rebecca Hinds

It’s such a great question, it’s a hard question. And the reason why it’s a hard question is we have what I call a meeting-suck reflex. Meaning we are conditioned to dislike meetings, and we are conditioned to believe that that’s how we should behave, right?

There are a few things that bond coworkers more than lamenting over that meeting that could have been a two-line email. And because of that, you can’t just go into an organization, your own organization, and ask people, “Are your meetings effective?” because you’re going to trigger that reflex and not the reality. And that’s why we need to be very careful about meeting measurement.

One of my top recommendations is, if you want to gut check into how effective your meetings are, the ones you run, after about 10% of those meetings, ask attendees, “On a scale of zero to five, was this meeting worth the time you invested?”

My colleague Elise Keith calls this ROTI, return on time investment, and it does a couple things. One, it’s usually, in almost all cases, anonymous, so it avoids that temptation to either inflate or deflate the ratings.

Two, unlike meetings, which are socially loaded, everyone has some intuitive sense of the value of their time, and they know more or less whether this has been a good investment of the time. So you avoid that sort of meeting-suck reflex and it’s simple, you know, it’s not after every meeting. Survey overload is real with an organization.

Finally, it’s coming from the attendees and not you as the organizer. My colleague, Steven Rogelberg has done fantastic research to show there are two people that tend to leave the meeting most satisfied, two types of people. One is the organizer and, two, as we’ve talked about, is the person who has spoken the most in the meeting.

And so we can’t ask those two people whether the meeting has been effective. Their ratings will be inflated. We need to ask the users, the attendees of the meeting, whether this meeting has been worth the time.

Often you see split ratings. Often you see a cohort rating the meetings five and four versus zero and one. And that can also be very helpful information to understand, “Okay, this meeting was worthwhile for some cohort of folks, but not for the entire attendee population. Well, now we can redesign the meeting and design it to be much more effective.”

Pete Mockaitis

Worthwhile. And I hear what you’re saying that it’s tricky because meetings have different objectives and that’s a handy gauge. I imagine every potential measure of meaning effectiveness could have some limitations.

This one is like, “Well, hey, you didn’t think it was effective, but, by golly, you needed to know that. And now you do. And it was essential that that occurred,” and emails get ignored. So I suppose there’s a big gray zone, too.

Rebecca Hinds
There is, and that’s why the agenda is also very important. I recommend framing every agenda item as a combination of a verb and a noun. So it’s not just budget discussion, it’s “align” or “decide” on the Q2 budget.

You’re being very clear about, “What is the verb we need to accomplish?” because then you can assess or you can now use AI to assess, “Have we done the thing?” because that is now a measure of effectiveness within the meeting. If you’re unclear on what you’re trying to achieve, well, it’s impossible to determine what it even means to be effective in terms of the meeting.

Pete Mockaitis
And I’m curious, if your verb is “inform,” what do we think? Some schools of thought would say, “Well, if all you’re doing is informing and it’s not a collaborative back and forth, then you should just do an email or some alternative medium.” What’s your take on that?

Rebecca Hinds

Exactly that. Information exchange is not a good purpose for a meeting. In the book, I talk about the 4D CEO rule, a two-part test to determine whether that meeting deserves to exist. First test, a meeting should only happen if the purpose is to debate, discuss, decide, or develop yourself or your team.

Information exchange, status updates, boss briefings, often these meetings are designed for the organizer, often for the powerful person in the room who either needs to consume information or disseminate information. In those settings, it is far more effective to communicate asynchronously through email, through Slack, and let attendees self-serve the information.

Pete Mockaitis

I think that’s very handy and sensible and that feels true. I’m wondering about this tricky challenge of, when folks have overwhelming inboxes and too much just flood of information coming at them, but it is essential that something gets to them, I think that’s one of the top reasons folks are tempted to do meetings, like these town hall meetings.

It’s like, “No, everyone really needs to know this. So we’re going to, by golly, put it on the calendar to make sure it gets there.” I’m curious, what’s your thought on making sure, in a world where that is not communicated via meeting, how do we make sure that the memo is sent and received?

Rebecca Hinds

It’s a great point and, you know, there’s the ideal case in organizations, there’s always the ideal case, and then there’s the reality. And the reality in many organizations is workers are overwhelmed. They’re overwhelmed with information and, often, the meeting feels like the most reliable way to get people’s attention to share the information.

There are certainly cases where that makes sense and that’s the unfortunate reality of our organizations, but in the best cases, we’re designing a communication system so that employees get the information they need and are able to distinguish between what’s important and what’s urgent.

And that requires being very clear in terms of, “What is the purpose of a meeting? What is the purpose of an email?” Ideally, you’re designing the asynchronous channels to be consumable and digestible, right? It’s not a memo that’s 20 pages that employees are needing to sift through.

You make it engaging. You make the asynchronous update a video. You make it a video where the CEO or executive team is in a location that has some personal relevance and it’s engaging to people.

Pete Mockaitis

There’s TikTok dancing.

Rebecca Hinds
There’s TikTok dancing, there’s family. One of my favorite all-time sales leaders would record videos after a run, dripping in sweat.

And that’s so important right now, that connection to leaders, not feeling like they’re on a different pedestal than the rest of the organization, which is often what happens in town halls or all hands or all staff meetings is you get this very rosy picture of reality in a way that does very little to strengthen the relationships between individual contributors and the people at the top of the organizational totem pole.

And even in the context of town halls, it’s usually significantly more effective to do those in smaller group settings. We know that as soon as a meeting or any team size gets above seven, eight, nine, 10 people, people start to check out.

Social loafing kicks in, people feel less supported. And so even if you’re doing far fewer town halls, but you’re doing them very intentionally in a way that can encourage back-and-forth dialogue between the individual contributors and the managers, well, that’s going to do so much more to boost the relationship.

Pete Mockaitis
When you say designing a communication system, that sounds very sophisticated, could you give us some examples that maybe we’re not thinking of, like, “Sure, I could say an email, maybe a loom video”? Are there other elements of a communication system that are super effective but underutilized in your view?

Rebecca Hinds

So there’s a really important delineation between synchronous ways of communication and asynchronous ways of communication. And a common misconception is inherently technologies are either asynchronous or synchronous.

We often think of Slack as an asynchronous communication channel, right, because it doesn’t require real-time communication – similar, email. But the reality is any technology can either be used asynchronously or synchronously, right?

We can, and we often do, operate in a world where Slack is treated like a synchronous communication. We get the ping and we’re immediately either drawn to it or respond to it. There is an implicit expectation that you are always available and responding. It’s far more important for organizations to think not so much about the technologies but around the cultures and practices and norms associated with asynchronous communication.

In order for asynchronous communication to work, in order for you to be able to transmit, convey information through asynchronous channels, there needs to be strong, strong documentation culture, right? There needs to be single sources of truth for this information, for the meeting transcripts, for the memos. There needs to be very strong written communication cultures.

And this is something that remote-first organizations tend to do really well. They even train their employees on, “How do you communicate in an effective way asynchronous?” That often requires significantly more context than in face-to-face interactions when you can ask the follow-up question.

I worked with an organization a couple years ago where they had a norm, a company-wide norm, that employees were evaluated on around “No lazy asks.” If you’re going to ask someone for something, it can’t be a lazy ask. You can’t remove context, fail to include context, include the deadline, include the why, include the what, right?

All of these things ensure that we can communicate more efficiently asynchronous, because if there’s ambiguity, if there’s uncertainty, well, people are going to schedule that meeting to get the information they need to move the work forward.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, I can’t help but think of the episode of “The Office” where the new boss asked Jim Halpert for a rundown, and he’s like, “Okay,” and so he spends the whole day worrying, “What does that even mean? What is a rundown?”

Rebecca Hinds

Yeah. And that’s the jargon, those are the acronyms, right? And we’re alienating people, in addition to adding ambiguity within the organization. And we see this all the time, you know, with the office jargon, the synergies, the circle backs.

Now with AI, people are, you know, it’s AI everything, “What are you talking about? And do you even need to include AI in what you’re saying?” It’s very important. I think written communication has never been more important, as well as verbal communication, right now.

Pete Mockaitis

And are there certain key things you’re looking at to ensure you have clarity and comprehensiveness or completion when you’re making an ask or trying to communicate a thing?

Rebecca Hinds

Deadlines are very important and, especially, I work with lot of global organizations being clear on what time zone. It sounds simple, but end of day Friday means something completely different in Japan versus San Francisco, as well as depending on your culture.

The why is very important, and we continue to see the why is significantly impactful in helping employees feel bought in to the ask. I see this especially, too, with policy, any sort of policy within an organization. We saw it with remote work, with remote and hybrid policies. We’re seeing it with AI right now.

One of the biggest predictors of whether people get on board with a policy is whether they understand the rationale behind it, even more so than whether they agree with it. And that helps them understand, “Is this worth my time? Is it worth my time to invest in this ask?”

If they can understand the why, the rationale behind it, and it’s something bigger than themselves, that’s going to motivate them to complete it, complete it well, and complete it on time.

Pete Mockaitis

And you’ve got a couple interesting concepts in your book I’d love to hear about. What is your meeting doomsday?

Rebecca Hinds

Meeting doomsday is my favorite meeting strategy to improve our meeting culture. It’s a 48-hour calendar cleanse. Employees delete their recurring meetings for 48 hours and then they re-add meetings back to their calendar in a way they think is going to be most effective.

So many meetings never make it back on the calendar. They’ve outlived their purpose. Perhaps they never had a purpose. For the meetings that have some value, they are redesigned. So thinking about the length, the cadence, the attendees, the agenda items, every meeting on our calendar can be redesigned to be most effective.

And we see significant benefit of this doomsday activity as opposed to a traditional meeting audit. We talked about addition sickness at the beginning and strategic subtraction. Well, what the doomsday does is it jolts you out of the status quo and makes subtraction the default.

When people are doing a meeting audit, they tend to justify the meetings because the meetings are still on their calendar. Whereas, the doomsday, it forces you out of the status quo and it gives employees social permission to delete the meetings in a way that removes that social guilt we all feel when we think about canceling meetings or think about not showing up to meetings.

Meetings are so personal that we often think people will take it personally, and they often do, if we cancel or don’t show up to the meeting. And so I recommend every organization do a meeting doomsday at least once a year. And, again, not just to save time, and we do see big time savings, but to reset our assumptions about what actually deserves to be a meeting.

Pete Mockaitis

So, okay, can you walk us through step-by-step in practice, if we’re saying, “Ooh, we like meeting doomsday. We’re going to do it”? How do I execute that step-by-step?

Rebecca Hinds

Lots of planning. It’s a radical effort. It requires lots of planning. It requires understanding, “Are you going to do it at an organizational level?” That’s ideal. Or, “Are you going to do it on a team level, department level?” I’ve done both. I’ve done as small as a nine-person team.

And then it’s about preparation, making sure there’s leadership buy in. The leadership is communicating the why behind this. There are clear instructions in terms of, “When are we going to do this? We’re not going to do this at the busiest time of the year. We’re going to do it in a lull period.”

How are people going to assess whether the meetings should be brought back? What dimensions are they going to use? Increasingly, I’m working with organizations to use AI to identify, flag those dysfunctional meetings. That becomes very exciting.

And then how are we going to celebrate? How are we going to celebrate along the way the success stories? This needs to be something that is fun. There’s a reason I call it meeting doomsday, right? There needs to be a rallying movement around it.

Meetings need to be the enemy. It’s not the person who scheduled the bad meeting. And we need to create a sense of energy around it. Get people bought in. And you start to see this becomes a big culture-building movement when done right.

And people become very excited about not only doing the doomsday, but also sticking to it. And meetings never are set in stone in terms of being effective. This is something we need ongoing maintenance to do. And, again, doing it at a consistent cadence every year is a way we continue to instill this practice of meeting hygiene.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. So then, when they are executing this, “It’s on this day,” I guess that’s the doomsday, “On this day, all recurring meetings, organization wide are deleted.” And then the hope, and with your prep and your communication and your pre-work, is that the new meetings that are established will be good and better ones, as opposed to just, “Oh, hey, I need that meeting. Let’s put it back on the calendar.”

Rebecca Hinds
Exactly. And there’s a big difference. I’ve studied two types of organizations. One, they’ll do this doomsday top-down. They’ll write a script, the IT team will come in and do a massive wipe of the calendar. I’ve seen that. You know, Dropbox did that. Shopify did that. Slack did that.

The meeting doomsday is explicitly designed to put that determination in the hands of employees because we know that, when employees do something themselves, they feel significantly more valuable. It feels significantly more valuable to them, and they’re more likely to stick to it.

Sometimes this is called the IKEA effect, right? When we build something ourselves, whether it’s an IKEA desk, a newly built idea, a newly built calendar, we’re much more likely to stick to it and value it even if it’s a little bit wobbly.

Pete Mockaitis
And what is your rule of halves?

Rebecca Hinds
The rule of halves, inspired by two folks I’ve talked about, Bob Sutton and Leidy Klotz, it’s essentially look at the four dimensions of your meeting – the length, the cadence, the attendees, and the agenda items – and decide one, two, three, or four dimensions you can cut in half.

And often this is a valuable practice as you’re doing the doomsday, but you can take any dysfunctional meeting or any meeting that you know isn’t fully optimized, and pick one dimension, cut it in half, take that 30 minute meeting, try to run it for just 15 minutes, take that six person meeting, “What if it’s three people?”

And what you often find is you didn’t need all that time, you didn’t need those attendees. You might cut too deep, but it’s also often in those moments where you go one step too far, do you realize what was actually essential and what was dead weight.

And so I think that’s, you know, whether you’re doing it one, two, three or four dimensions, the rule of halves can be another effective way to jolt us out of the status quo. I think we often, in organizations, suffer from what’s called Parkinson’s Law, too, meaning work expands to fill the time allotted.

If we give a meeting 30 minutes, if we give a meeting 60 minutes, which is what our calendar tells us should be a meeting, well, it’s probably going to take that 30 minutes, 60 minutes because of this Parkinson’s Law. Whereas, if we cut it to 15 minutes or 30 minutes, it’s more diligent in terms of encouraging us to stick to that time. We’re more diligent because we only have that time available.

Pete Mockaitis
And what are those four dimensions again?

Rebecca Hinds
The length, so the duration of the meeting; the cadence, so thinking about weekly versus monthly, quarterly meetings; the attendees, only inviting stakeholders, not spectators or meeting tourists; and the agenda items. So thinking about, very carefully, “What are the agenda items we want to include on the agenda?”

We also know that agendas suffer from what’s called the law of triviality, meaning, we will disproportionately spend more time on the agenda items that are the least important, the most trivial. And so it’s very dangerous to add agenda items that are trivial, much less important than the higher stakes one, in part because they feel safer.

They feel safer for people to weigh in on. In general, most people want to hear their voice in the meeting, as we’ve talked about, and everyone feels more safe to weigh in on the trivial topics as opposed to the higher stakes one.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I’m thinking about this a lot when it comes to, like, color choices or names of something. And it’s kind of, like, “You know, if people like it, they’re going to buy it no matter what colors on the website or what we call it within reason.” And so, yeah, that is a great observation.

Rebecca Hinds
Naming, font sizes, what do we do over the weekend, what are we eating at the offsite, you know, all of these things. And we see it all the time in meetings, and it’s a reflection of the law of triviality. The other bias is the primacy effect, meaning we will also spend disproportionately more time on the first agenda item. And so agenda design is very, very important as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And you also talk about injecting delight into meetings. What are your favorite approaches for this?

Rebecca Hinds
Yes, delight. Now, delight is interesting because delight is a combination of two things. It’s a combination of joy and it’s a combination of surprise. So, delight needs to have an element of surprise. Employees, attendees can’t be expecting it for it to work.

And so, this is something that I recommend it be 10 seconds, a minute in the meeting, an unexpected shoutout for an employee that has done something well. You’re bringing some, you know, food item. Food is a great engagement booster in the meeting that has some personal connection.

Something that is going to leave employees remembering the meeting and wanting to show up the next time. It sounds trivial, but so much of our meeting dysfunction is driven by the fact that employees dread meetings and they’re largely rinse and repeat.

Delight ensures that there’s that moment of surprise that’s positive and joyful that employees will keep coming back to and keep wanting more of.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Rebecca, tell me, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we hear about your favorite things?

Rebecca Hinds
No, I think that the common thread through all of this is intentionality and intentional design and how do we ensure that we are treating meetings as that important product.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Rebecca Hinds
I’ve always loved the quote, “The harder you work, the luckier you get.” And I really believe that.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And could you share a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Rebecca Hinds
So we’ve done some research over the past few years looking at the mental models through which employees approach AI.

And what we’re starting to see, we’ve seen it for years, we’re still seeing, is depending on whether people are approaching AI from the mental model of a tool versus teammate, they interact with the technology differently and they’re significantly more likely to be productive when they approach AI with the mental model of the teammate because they’re not just asking, “What can the technology do for me in a really transactional way?”

They’re asking, “What can I do with the technology?” They’re also recognizing that AI is not perfect. They’re not giving up after the first prompt. They’re pushing the technology to think and act deeper. And I think that’s at the core of a lot of the failures of AI transformation right now, is not recognizing how important the psychology is and how important that relationship between humans and AI is.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Rebecca Hinds
So I’m a massive fan of both Bob Sutton and Adam Grant’s books, so Give and Take is a key one that has influenced so much of my life, as well as Bob Sutton’s book, Scaling Up Excellence, The Friction Project.

I think “The Friction Project,” in particular, is so relevant right now in terms of, “How do we ensure that we are injecting good friction into our organization through the use of AI,” for example, “and removing the bad friction from our organization’s dysfunctional meaning?” are one great example of negative friction.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite tool?

Rebecca Hinds

So I work at Glean. Glean is my new favorite tool. I use it for all things AI. It’s my first pane of glass into my work in the morning, and it’s a highly intelligent teammate that helps me do my work.

Pete Mockaitis
And is there a key nugget you share that seems to really connect and resonate with audiences, they quote it back to you often?

Rebecca Hinds

You know, I think I work with a lot of organizations on change management, and I think my mantra is always “Change doesn’t fail because of the technology, it fails because of the humans.” And as we think about AI, in particular, but also meetings and everything in between, making sure that we’re designing for the humans involved is super important.

Pete Mockaitis
And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Rebecca Hinds
I’m on LinkedIn. My book, Your Best Meeting Ever is at all your favorite bookstores. And my website is RebeccaHinds.com.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Rebecca Hinds
Do that meeting doomsday. I think it’s the single most effective way to jolt you out of the status quo and get a small team and do it together.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Rebecca, thank you.

Rebecca Hinds
Thanks so much, Pete.

1014: How to Make Meetings Better for Everyone with Calendly’s Darren Chait

By | Podcasts | One Comment

Darren Chait discusses how to make meetings more engaging using data from Calendly’s State of Meetings 2024 research.

You’ll Learn

  1. Why 81% of respondents want more meetings 
  2. Three meetings to keep—and the one to stop 
  3. Surprising statistics on meeting etiquette 

About Darren 

Darren Chait is the VP of Marketing at Calendly, leading the world-class marketing organization. Previously, he was a co-founder of Hugo, the leading meeting workflow solution powering meetings for tens of thousands of customers backed by Google, Slack and Atlassian.

In a prior life, Darren was a corporate lawyer at one of Australia’s leading law firms, where he attended meetings for a living – the start of his passion for meetings and the future of work.

Resources Mentioned

Thank You, Sponsors!

Darren Chait Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Darren, welcome.

Darren Chait
Thanks, Pete. Thanks for having me.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to get into your unique vantage point, your insights, your wisdom. So, you work at Calendly, which is my all-time favorite meeting scheduling software. Use it in two businesses. So, great job, guys.

Darren Chait
Good to hear those. Thank you.

Pete Mockaitis
I’m curious, while you’ve been there, how many meetings have been scheduled in Calendly?

Darren Chait
Personally? Thousands.

Pete Mockaitis
Thousands? Millions?

Darren Chait
Well, yeah. I’d say thousands. I’ve been at Calendly for two and a half years. I think I probably would have exceeded hundreds. I spend a lot of my day in meetings, like we all do, which is why it’s such a good topic for discussion. And I really try and schedule most via Calendly because who’s got time to jump around with the back and forth and try to coordinate multiple schedules? And being an Australian, living between the US and Australia, time zones are a nightmare. So, I need Calendly to work, and luckily, so do other folks.

Pete Mockaitis
And how many meetings has the Calendly software product platform scheduled for humanity?

Darren Chait
That’s a very good question. That’s not a number that we’ve actually published before. So, you’ve heard it here first, if I had to do the math quickly, I wonder if we’ve crossed a billion, it’s possible, but I’m not sure. So, keep that one between us, all right? But I want to look into that. It’s the number I should know off the top of my head.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, we’ll say rounded to the nearest billion and one million.

Darren Chait
Exactly, that’s right. It’s closer to a billion than zero, but it could even be more. I’ll have to check on that one.

Pete Mockaitis
All right, so that’s cool. So, a billion meetings, and you’ve been in many yourself, personally there. I’d love to hear, off the top of your head, what are some of the most striking, surprising, fascinating discoveries you’ve made about us workers and meetings from your vantage point here?

Darren Chait
We’ve recently published a report on this. We do it every year, and the 2024 State of Meetings Report, went in and asked over a thousand workers a whole lot of questions about meetings. And what I love about this process, this piece of content is because we do it year on year, things are changing right in front of us.

So, the number one thing that jumped out at me, which I can’t reconcile, I don’t know what your thoughts are, Pete, but 81% of workers want more meetings. Here we are talking about meetings being the bane of our existence, competing with productive work, there’s a million and one memes about meetings that should have been emails and those sorts of things, but the overwhelming majority say, “Give me more.”

Pete Mockaitis
Fascinating. Okay, now I imagine that the devil’s in the details in terms of do they want more meetings like the ones they’re having right now? Or are they looking for something else on the menu that they haven’t received yet to appease their appetite?

Darren Chait
Yeah, exactly. It’s both. So, number one, firstly, productive meetings was the caveat there. We want more productive meetings. Are we having productive meetings today? Yes and no. But I think there’s a more interesting take, which was my opinion, anyway. We sort of said, “Why? Like, how do meetings help you?”

And if you look at all the different reasons why people love meetings, 51% said connection with colleagues, 44% said more collaboration, and the list goes on. And what it really led me to think is that we’re in this new world where we’re now post-COVID, we can’t blame COVID anymore, but it’s certainly reset the way we work. We have many, many, many remote-first companies out there, many, many, many hybrid companies, and some companies that are operating in a traditional office environment, but we’re really just seeking out connection.

So, yes, we want more productive meetings, but based on what respondents said in this particular survey, and what I hear talking to folks every day, meetings are how we stay connected. It’s how we build relationships at work, it’s how we make the work we do human. So, I guess it’s not that surprising if you think about it like that.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, we like more meetings, in so far as they are productive and connecting. Got it. And can you lay it out for us, just how much time are we spending in meetings these days?

Darren Chait
Most of us, in terms of the respondents, are only having one or two meetings a day, but about half are having three or more meetings a day, and I guess it comes down to what you do for work, right? So, this year for 20% told us, they’re spending more than six hours per week in meetings, which, 20% doesn’t seem like a whole lot. But I think there’s a few things to consider.

Firstly, the folks that are customer-facing, we heard way higher. We saw five, six hours a day in some cases. The folks that aren’t customer-facing, so in roles that they don’t need to be talking to customers, just internally, is where we saw those numbers of one or two meetings a day.

The other thing is you might have two meetings a day at two hours in total, which doesn’t sound like much, but think about the time needed to prepare for the meeting, to travel to the meeting, in some cases, attend, take notes, travel from, identify what the follow-ups were, share them out, and before you know it, your two hours of meetings a day could be closer to four. And that’s why the cost of these meetings and making them productive and valuable matters so much.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, let’s talk about making them productive and valuable. What are some of your top insights and discoveries here associated with what makes meetings excellent versus bad?

Darren Chait
The fundamental question is whether you need a meeting at all. It’s 2024, we have a ton of technology at our fingertips, there’s so many different ways to collaborate and communicate, but in many cases, we just jump straight back to the calendar.

I used to tell my team, I’m in a different role, there’s only three reasons you need a meeting, the three D’s: debate, discussion, and decision-making. So, if that’s not going to happen, does it need to be a meeting? Can I send them a video, right, with, “Here’s what I want you to know, the background on this particular topic,” or, “Here is the plan for next quarter,” or, “Here is some feedback on something I’ve read.”

If I don’t need debate, discussion, or decision-making, I can share that asynchronously via video. And there’s many other different ways we can achieve that. So, if you don’t need to have a meeting at all, that’s the number one way you can reduce the cost of those meetings.

Pete Mockaitis
And I suppose connection as well, it doesn’t fit into the nice 3D framework, and it’s not necessarily about making productive value creation happen, but that is a key source of reason and value of a meeting going down.

Darren Chait
That’s a very good point. I think you’re right, and it sounds like that’s what people are craving. So, even if we could do everything async, we would be losing out on that element of connection. But then, again, is a meeting always the best way to achieve that connection? Can we catch up spontaneously? Can I give you a call? Can I text you and say it’d be great to have a one-on-one and check how things are tracking and hop on the phone? Different style of meetings can, obviously, favor connection and can be achieved that way.

But a traditional meeting, if I have eight people in the room, in a meeting room with some slides up on the screen and so on, debatable the level of connection you get there. But it’s a good point and something to keep in mind.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, with the three D’s – the debate, the discussion, the decisions – what are some inappropriate meetings then, meetings we’re having where this is not occurring that should perhaps sound the alarm bell for us, and make us say, “Wait a sec, maybe this meeting should not exist anymore”?

Darren Chait
The knowledge sharing meeting, I think that’s the one. worst culprit. So, where I’m just coming to share information, “So, can everyone come because I need to present the 2025 plan for whatever with you?” And you come along, and everyone’s happy because I’ve got some interest in the 2025 plan, and I go and tell you a story for 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 60 minutes, and that was helpful to know. I need to know your plan.

But do we really need everyone in a meeting on the schedule that I dictated, joining the Zoom call, or traveling to the meeting, sitting there at the same time, perhaps having distractions because I’ve determined the time that they have to listen, and really, they’re just gleaning this information from me. Could I not have shared that some other way? So, that’s one. I think that jumps out at me a lot.

The other alarm bell for me when I look at a meeting is the attendees – too many or too few. Too many is where everyone has some sort of, you know, interest in the topic. They all join this meeting and you’re never going to have any real debate or discussion, right? There’s 20 people in the room. Even if there’s 12 people in the room, that’s just not going to happen. We can’t have this productive discussion with, effectively, a conference that we’re running.

Or, too few people in the room, or the wrong people in the room. How are we going to make a decision? I can’t go and talk about planning or strategy when Pete clearly is a stakeholder who couldn’t attend and has to be a part of the decision, or talk about what we’re doing for social next year where there’s no social media marketing folks there. So, the attendees is the second red flag that jumps out at me.

And then, I guess, the third thing I’ll say, which is back to really tips for a great meeting, they sound obvious, but we don’t do them well, which is goals for that meeting. So, when you actually look, and ask yourself, you shouldn’t have to ask yourself, it should be clear, but if you have to ask yourself what the goal of the meeting is. If you can’t answer that very quickly, we shouldn’t have had that meeting. We didn’t need that meeting in the first place.

So, what do we need to walk out of this room with, virtual or physical? If we haven’t achieved this, this meeting has been a waste of time. If you can’t express that for a meeting, at least once it’s started, I think we’re making a mistake here.

Pete Mockaitis
So, when it comes to the right number and the right people in the meeting, you have some work there associated with folks having a specific role. Could you expand on that?

Darren Chait
So, one of the downsides to virtual meetings in 2024 is the risk of multitasking and distraction. We know that 52% of workers report multitasking always or often in virtual meetings. Now, yeah, it doesn’t surprise me, but when you look at it like that in the numbers, it’s mind blowing. That means, in every meeting I go to, more than half the folks in the room are doing something else.

Pete Mockaitis
When they’re remote?

Darren Chait
Yeah, they’re doing both. Now, how well can we do both? Well, I won’t debate you on that topic, I know we’ve all got different views there, but you don’t have 100% of their attention. And I’ve got a goal here for this meeting, we don’t want to walk out of the room without achieving this meeting, but I know half the people there are doing something else. So, that’s number one.

And then, to more directly answer your question around engagement level for different types of meetings, if I have an assigned role in that meeting, we saw more than 90% say that they’re engaged in that meeting, “I’m actively listening.” So, an assigned role, I might be chairing, I might be taking notes, I might be presenting a piece of it, everyone’s kind of listening. Very few said otherwise.

But if I don’t have an assigned role in that meeting, it’s almost inverted. We see, at this point, almost 30% of folks who are somewhat disengaged or completely disengaged. And that role, again, could be part of a brainstorm, providing a status update. Again, taking notes, whatever the role is, it makes a very, very big difference.

The reason I like this stat, it sounds obvious, again, naturally, if people don’t need to be there, number one, they’re not going to be engaged. But even if people need to be there, it’s really important to run these meetings in a way where other folks are involved, where there’s collaboration happening, if you want everyone to be engaged. And as I mentioned, particularly for virtual meetings, you’re competing with that 52% who are doing something else otherwise.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, that’s kind of fascinating, and there’s a whole lot of debate right now like, “Everybody come back to the office!” “No, we don’t want to come back to the office!” Or some people are like, “No, we’re fine, you don’t need to go back to the office.” So, that’s sort of raging now in 2024, and probably will continue in 2025.

And so, I can imagine, if those people who are calling the meetings are aware of these phenomena, that’s probably sort of annoying to them, “No, I would like you to be physically in the space such that you cannot be multitasking.” But, at the same time, I think some people really do perhaps think and function better when we’re multitasking.

I’ve been to meetings where someone’s on his walking treadmill desk, and it’s like, “More power to you. I think your brain is working better when you’re moving, and that’s cool.” Or folks are able to just kind of move around a little bit, or fidget with some things, or ponder. I think, I don’t know, I don’t have any evidence in terms of scientific randomized control trials on this, but I think some people just happen to be in a more comfortable thinking, working groove when they have the flexibility to be in their own space.

And yet, having a little bit of that forced pressure of, “No, you’re here and there’s no escaping. There is no multitasking available in this room without you looking rude and embarrassing yourself.” So, it is really juicy and personal what’s at stake here.

Darren Chait
I have two views on that. I think fascinating point. One is what sort of multitasking, right? So, I’m a big fan of the walking meeting. A lot of my team will know, I’ll put in the AirPods and go for a walk and have a conversation at the same time. Certain meetings, right? That works great when we’re catching up about the week and I’m helping to hear and unblock.

But if I’m going to have a really direct conversation with you about feedback or performance, or we’re trying to solve a problem that might be financial and we’re sharing our screen, obviously, you can’t do it that way. Similarly, if I’m sitting in a meeting and I’m now working on writing a piece of content, there’s no way I’m listening or engaged with what you’re saying. No part of my brain can do that. So, I think it comes down to definitions of multitasking. It’s a fair point that some types of multitasking can be productive.

The other side I was going to mention is around remote, and Calendly, full disclosure, Calendly is a remote-first company. What we mean by remote-first is we designed a workplace, a way of working, that takes into account the fact that our team is remote. And I think what we learned through the pandemic, many companies sort of just picked up their culture and dropped it in online and ran into a lot of issues. Different businesses have different views on the topic, and that’s why many companies have required their employee base back to the office, either full-time or part-time.

If you design a meeting culture around the way you’re set up, I don’t think it makes any difference. So, if I’m running highly collaborative meetings where everyone’s engaged and has a role to play in that meeting, I’m going to see the same levels of engagement, or higher even, than I would if I force everyone into the room such that they can’t be on another device, such that they can’t be doing something else.

And to your point, Pete, many people do better because you think better when you’re on your treadmill while you’re in that meeting or when you go for your walking meeting, and we allow for that. So, I guess what I’m saying here is your meeting culture and the way you meet has to be purposeful and intentional based on the way your organization operates.

Pete Mockaitis
And to your point about our own idiosyncrasies and perceptions, you’ve actually got some fun tidbits about etiquette, like what we consider to be rude or unacceptable. This is fun, because I think some people wonder, “Is it okay if I do this on this meeting?” Well, you actually have some answers. Lay the numbers on us, Darren.

Darren Chait
So, in general, we asked a whole lot of questions around, “Is it okay to eat in a meeting? Is it okay to schedule over lunch?” and those sorts of questions, things we do all the time. And let me run you through some of this data.

So, in general, we saw that 23% think eating in a meeting on camera is totally fine.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, so 77% thinks it’s not fine.

Darren Chait
No, no, no. But, if you’re on mute and your camera’s off, that’s fine.

Pete Mockaitis
And they’ll never know.

Darren Chait
Most people thought that was okay, 68% said that’s fine, “I just don’t want to see you taking those bites.” I thought that was interesting. I’ve definitely been a bit self-reflective after that because I’ve probably been guilty of that over the years. But some more, I guess, relevant ones to the way we work, the dynamics with camera on and camera off is really fascinating. So, when most people have their camera on, 39% said it’s okay for you to have your camera off, but, obviously, 61% said the opposite.

Pete Mockaitis
So, 61% said, “I want those cameras on.”

Darren Chait
Yep, that’s right. “If some people’s cameras are on, yours better be on,” that’s what they’re saying. And that kind of makes sense, right? You’re trying to build connection here. You know you’re remote in these examples, they’re virtual meetings. It’s hard to do that when you’re the one that’s not there. You think about the real world parallel. So, I wasn’t too surprised by that, the people weighed it up.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, what would the real world parallel be, like you just have a black bag over your head? It’s like, “Okay, I’m not available to be looked at.”

Darren Chait
It’s true. It’s true. Again, it’s funny with technology because, just a few years ago, if you weren’t in the office, hopping on the phone is totally acceptable with no camera. But now that we have the likes of Zoom at our fingertips, no longer good.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, and I think it gets to the notion of, “Well, hey, if this was a properly sized meeting with the proper people in attendance, it makes sense for everyone there to be on their camera,” in most contexts, as I think through it. And yet if it’s like, “Well, you invited 80 people to this meeting when, really, only nine are there,” it’s sort of like the other 71 are more so spectators, so, like, it seems to make sense to turn the cameras off at that point.

Darren Chait
And that’s why I blame the media organizer, or the onus is on the media organizer. If you have a meeting where folks consistently have their camera off, or if they are doing things while the meeting is running, rather than go to the attendees, and say, “Why are you doing this?” you should be looking at yourself, and saying, “Hang on, what is it about this meeting that disengages, that means that folks can go and do something else, or have their camera off?”

So, I think that’s the feedback there. I think related to multitasking point, before I shared some data with you around how many people are typically multitasking during a meeting, but what surprised me is 70% said that’s okay. They don’t have a problem with it. So, then 30% said, “Nope, everyone should be there.” I don’t personally agree with that.

Again, if you’re running a great meeting and everyone needs to be there, I think that number should be lower. But I think it’s a sign of the fact that we’re not all running those great meetings. We’re all attending many meetings. We don’t have enough hours in the day to get our work done because we’re attending all of these meetings that maybe I didn’t need to be in and that’s why I’m multitasking and that’s why I think it’s okay.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, that’s some good stuff about inside a meeting. Anything else you want to share about best or worst practices when you’re inside a meeting?

Darren Chait
So, generally, I mean, from a data standpoint, we asked some questions about folks calling in when they’re not at their desk, but others are at their desks, only 37% thought that was okay. I was offended by that one. Again, I’m a fan of that walking meeting. If people are at their desks, you should be calling in the same way and so on, so similar sorts of insights.

But really, we’re just seeing the same trends again and again in terms of great meetings, great engagement, everyone needs to be there, everyone’s there. Poor meetings, unclear goals, not everyone needs to be in the room, didn’t need to be in a meeting, everyone disengages, and technology has made that so much easier, because I can click one button and turn my camera off. And again, I can’t do that in the live meeting like we discussed.

Pete Mockaitis
And that’s really intriguing. The word “should” is so heavy, like, with judgment, you know. And I guess it varies how strongly people hold these “shoulds.” Like, is it more like, “I’d kind of prefer if it were on,” versus, “I can’t believe this unprofessionalism on the other side”?

But I think that really highlights the need to have these conversations because we might very well be entering into this situation, blindly unaware, it’s like, “Well, no, I got my video camera off because, I mean, it’s during lunchtime and I’m hungry and I’m going to get really cranky if I don’t eat. You’re going to have a dumber Pete if I don’t eat. So, this is all in everyone’s best interest for me to be eating right now.”

So, I’m just thinking, “Hey, I’m making prudent decisions that make sense for me and my team and organization.” And unbeknownst to me, I’m getting some judgments from others participating in the meeting, so it sounds extra super important that we have those conversations candidly and upfront so that we’re not incurring the negativity that can just be unspoken and foment and grow, you know?

Darren Chait
Well said. And it gets even more complicated culturally because different demographic factors drive different opinions. I saw in the research, for example, 72% of folks in the US feel like it’s okay to eat off camera, but only 64% in the UK felt that way. So, if you’re meeting with Americans, have your lunch. If you’re meeting with Brits, maybe not a good idea. And there’s generational differences and all sorts of others. So, to your point, being clear on expectations and the way we’re operating this meeting matters because you’re never going to make everyone happy.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah. Yeah, that’s handy. Well, I think it’s just good that the fact that you have this report gets some people thinking and perhaps more likely to discuss, “Oh, hey, I had no idea that a reasonable portion of you might find my behavior completely unacceptable. Why don’t we go ahead and chat about that, shall we?”

Darren Chait
We actually had that a few weeks ago. We have a weekly meeting with the team, and a lot of the team don’t have their camera on, and there’s 40-something people in this meeting, and I get it. Everyone’s got busy. This meeting has just been dropped on their calendar. We haven’t really found a time that suits everyone. It’s impossible with so many folks, and about half of them come with camera on, half come with camera off.

And for the people that are presenting content in that meeting or sharing and driving the discussion, it’s really difficult because there’s no feedback, right? When I’m chatting live with video, we can read each other’s faces and body language and build a great relationship. If you’re just a name, it becomes really hard.

So, we did two things at the same time. One is we set expectations. I said to the team, “Hey, I really want to make this into a meeting that you have your camera on, and I’ll explain why.” And I gave that rationale. And at the same time, we redesigned the way we ran that meeting so it was a lot more collaborative, we had a lot more engagement. Even though it’s a big team, we’d have breakouts most times, we’d have polls running, we’d have an open agenda that anyone could add to.

And both of those things together, a terribly designed scientific trial, both of those things together changed the way this meeting operated. So, I think it comes down to, as we keep saying, right, being clear on expectations and why it matters, but also creating meetings where we want to be there, we get value out of them, and naturally I’m going to be engaged.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, Darren, let’s dork out a little bit, if I may, on tech tools. So, Calendly is one of the finest software as a service tool as I’m aware of on the planet. So, yep, I said it. I made it, Darren. You can quote me if you like.

Darren Chait
It must be true then. I’ll take that. I was going to say, just capture that.

Pete Mockaitis
So, yeah, it sounds like you’re doing some cool stuff with regard to the open agenda, the polls. Lay it on us, in terms of when you’re in meeting, what are some cool tech features you’re utilizing, and how’s it go down?

Darren Chait
So, firstly, talking about Calendly, as you and hopefully many of the listeners are familiar, we make scheduling automation software, so we make them very easy to book meetings with you and with your team and co-workers from your website, directly by sharing a link, balancing multiple schedules, round-robining, allowing lead routing, whatever the use case is, we want to make scheduling very easy.

And the reason I share this with you is some of my favorite features and tools out there related to meetings actually happen in the pre- and post-. So, I know one of the common reasons I hear why people buy Calendly reminds me of great meeting practice, which is confirming the meeting, sharing out content before the meeting, and sending that thank-you or that follow-up after the meeting.

But, in general, whatever tooling you’re using to do that, you got to do it, you just got to do it. You have to make sure that everyone knows why they’re coming, what the goal is, and making sure they’re actually attending, and then that you capture the value afterwards. So, sure, use Calendly’s workflows by all means, but otherwise, find a way to do it.

Outside Calendly, we spoke earlier about avoiding the meeting. Here at Calendly, we’re big fans of Loom. Loom is an asynchronous video collaboration tool. They’re actually now part of Atlassian, but you can buy Loom independently too and they’ve got a free tier I believe. And the reason I love Loom is it helps me avoid those meetings when I don’t need meetings, but it does it in what I would call a high bandwidth way.

So, here’s what I mean. If I want to share something with you, Pete, I can go and send you an email or a message, say, a Slack message, and say, “Hey, Pete, I want you to know what I’m thinking about this topic, and here’s some feedback on this work,” you just deliver in bullet points. You’re going to come to work. Firstly, I can do it on my schedule, time zone, the way I work, when whatever my workday looks like.

But you’re going to come to work, you’re going to read this message, and you’re going to have 50 questions, right? You’re going to wonder if what I really meant was this or that, if I’m unhappy about that, what the tone was there. Or, I can send you a video, which is what Loom allows me to do. I can record a video, and say, “Hey Pete, great work there. I want you to be even better because you’re next in line for that director promotion. Here are some tips to make your amazing work absolutely incredible.” And I can run through that.

And, very quickly, you’re seeing my tone, my body language, the words in between, the real words, and you’ve got a completely different message delivered, and we’ve avoided that meeting with all those questions. So, async video tools like Loom, I’m a big fan.

Pete Mockaitis
I love Loom so much, and I’m amazed at just how much you could accomplish there. We bought a company about a year ago, and much communication between buyer and sellers is like, “Hey, so here’s kind of how I’m thinking about the financing situation, dah, dah, dah.”

And so, like, we’re going into all these details of a spreadsheet, and so it’s like, “Huh, this is kind of high stakes kind of a communication, and yet we all recognize that, yeah, this is the best way to do it. We want to say, ‘Wait, what was that sell? Where did you get that number? Where’s that coming from?” And we can’t find the right time to meet together quickly, but it’s like, so it really kept our back-and-forths moving faster as opposed to, “Oh, I guess we could all meet Thursday.” “No, give me the Loom Monday, and then we’ll all have our comments Monday evening.”

Darren Chait
Exactly. I love it. What a great testimonial. So, I think that’s an absolute secret for success.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. All right. So, Loom or something like it enables you to, very quickly, easily do a screen record share. You can see your face in a bubble and mark up documents or spreadsheets or work products of any sort. Very cool. Any other favorite tools?

Darren Chait
So, at my core, I’m a marketer. I crave voice of customer. I want to hear from the customer all the time. So, looking for solutions that allow me to do more of that, and there’s lots out there and it depends on the nature of customer and so on. So, without going to a specific solution, because I think it depends on the company, if you can find a tool that helps you record customer conversations and allows you to share them around internally, that is game-changing. That helps us organize.

Because, in my marketing org, I can go and tell you what the customer says, I can give you slide deck after slide deck, spreadsheet after spreadsheet, until you’ve heard a real human standing right there, talk about the value they get from your product or service, the challenges they have with your product and service, nothing aligns you more like a marketer. But it’s also an area that we’re very interested in directionally at Calendly.

We are moving beyond just scheduling. We are very interested in tasks around meetings, preparation, engagement, and follow-up. I think you’ve got to find ways to capture what’s discussed in meetings and circulate them and surface them and share them to create that organization that’s always working for the customer.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s cool. So, when you say record the voice of the customer. Is that just as simple as, “Hey, we’re on a Zoom, or a Google Meet, or whatever, and I’m clicking record, and now here’s the snippet”? So, what you’re saying is there’s tools that make it even simpler than that?

Darren Chait
Totally, yeah. I know a lot of enterprise organizations use Gong, for example, where sales calls are recorded, you can search and share snippets so there definitely are. But, again, it’s a bit like some of the meeting features and workflows I mentioned earlier. It’s a way of working more than a particular tool that matters. And we really have seen total change in the way we work and collaborate and how customer-centric we are as we’ve created that culture of sharing meetings.

Because the thing about meetings, right, I should have said at the beginning, is we love to hate them. Yes, they drive all of these great outcomes for our business, but it’s where business gets done. If you think about external meetings, every meeting you have with someone outside your business is somehow tied to making money, or recruiting to have the right team to make money, or build relationships that ultimately may lead to customer acquisition, whatever it is.

So, the fact that we’re letting the value of these meetings dissipate into thin air when the meetings end doesn’t make sense. So, we need to capture them, and the same rationale is, the same reasons why we have to make sure we take notes, we have to make sure that we have follow-ups, and make sure those follow-ups actually happen and so on. So, just all of these ways of working and tools out there are all really reminding us of the fact of the value of every meeting.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so, inside a meeting with remote technology operating, you mentioned open agenda, polls, whatever. So, these are just the features baked into your Zoom or Google Meet or whatever you’re using?

Darren Chait
Yep, yep. In many cases, yep.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay, just making the most of them. Like, they’re there for you. Go ahead and learn about them. Try them out.

Darren Chait
Yep, and like that, we won’t be eating in meetings anymore, right, because I’ll be so engaged in what we’re talking about.

Pete Mockaitis
“I get to vote! I’m excited!” It might not be immediately that transformational.

Darren Chait
Yeah, that’s it.

Pete Mockaitis
It may or may not be that immediately transformational.

Darren Chait
There you go. That’s the disclaimer.

Pete Mockaitis
But you’re right, it is fun. It’s intriguing. I don’t know about you, but something about real-time data, there’s a little bit of a reveal. If it’s an interesting question, like, “Oh, hey, how many of you are calling in from the West Coast?” It’s like, “Okay, I don’t know.” But like, if I’m genuinely wondering in terms of like, “Hey, we came up with 12 ideas. I’d love for everyone to vote on which ones they think are the most likely to be high impact and they want to start on first.” Like, I don’t know about you, but that just gets my heart thumping a little bit. Like, “Ooh, who’s going to be the winner?” It’s like election night, like county by county.

Darren Chait
You know what though, Pete, if you said, “Does anyone have any views on how we should prioritize this?” Silence. Right?

Pete Mockaitis
Totally.

Darren Chait
We use a lot of Miro here as well. Miro is an online whiteboarding tool, and there’s a few of them around as well, and some of them are embedded in other products and so on. The reason I like Miro is it allows a very fluid, freeform way to collaborate in the form of whiteboards. But they have a lot of great real-time tools you can share.

You can share your Miro board for your Zoom or directly, and it’s great for voting. People can put stickies. They can contribute to a conversation. They can drive that collaboration in a real way. So, that’s what you’re reminding me of as you’re talking about that behavior because it definitely does exist.

Pete Mockaitis
Very nice. Well, Darren, tell me, any other key things you want to make sure to mention, any top do’s or don’ts?

Darren Chait
So, one other thing to mention that we noticed in the research this year, and again, I’m not surprised, but also really cool at the same time. We asked, in general, we asked all the respondents in this survey their views on the role of AI in meetings, if they’re interested in the use of AI in meetings.

2023, 17% said yes. This year, almost 50% said yes. But we’re all learning so much about AI every day and the advent of all the big players in tech in AI. It’s now very clear, to these respondents at least, that it’s here, we’re heading there. Most products are releasing AI features now, particularly those in the meeting space, Calendly included, and we’re coming up there soon.

So, I think it’s fascinating to see that AI has unlocked a ton more powerful online, and it’s a logical place to start, right, to make us more productive in our meetings, more effective. So, that trend in just 12 months was really surprising to me.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now can you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Darren Chait
One of my favorite quotes, in general, in business, comes from, it’s actually been quoted many times by many people so I won’t try to attribute it, which is not to confuse work with progress. So, something I often think about is, “Is this just work keeping me busy or is this actual progress or output?” So, “Don’t mistake work with progress” is one of my favorite business quotes.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite book?

Darren Chait
Team of Teams, General Stanley McChrystal. Definitely a bit of a less conventional business book, but a must-read if you’re leading a team.

Pete Mockaitis
And a favorite habit?

Darren Chait
I don’t end my day until I’ve got a plan for the next day. I think, especially with time zones and the likes of Slack and other tools now that bombard us when we’re not online, you always wake up, you always start your day feeling behind. So, I, at least, want to start my day having clarity for the goals for the next day.

Pete Mockaitis
And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Darren Chait
Absolutely. So, obviously, if you want to learn more about Calendly, Calendly.com. But on LinkedIn, always happy to connect and chat and nerd out on these topics, and we can, yeah, definitely dive more into what we’ve learned. You can also, if you go to Calendly.com. If you scroll all the way to the bottom of the page, you’ll see a link or other resources to the State of Meetings 2024 so you can dive into this data. And there’s many more thoughts and perspectives here that we didn’t have time for, but you can nerd out on the State of Meetings yourself as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Darren Chait
Go through your calendar, and look at those meetings that are competing for productive time. See what you can cut, and then choose a favorite meeting and see if you can make it that much better. Go and look at who’s attending. Look at your process around setting agendas and planning. Look at the tooling that you’re using to power that meeting, scheduling all the way through to follow-ups, and see if you can get that favorite meeting performing that much better. And no doubt you will, you’ll see the results and you’ll move on to the next one. So, meetings really are a hack for team productivity, and I encourage you to try it out.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Darren, thank you. I wish you many excellent meetings.

Darren Chait
Thanks, Pete. Likewise. Great to chat.

946: Why Most Projects Fail and What to Do About it with Kory Kogon

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

Kory Kogon offers her practical guide for effective project management–even when you’re not the official project manager.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why most projects fail
  2. Key questions to ask before starting any project 
  3. The five behaviors of successful unofficial project manager

About Kory

Kory Kogon is FranklinCovey’s vice president of Content and Senior Consultant. She is the Wall Street Journal bestselling co-author of The 5 Choices: The Path to Extraordinary Productivity, and has appeared as an expert on TODAY, MSNBC’s Your Business, Forbes.com, Inc.com, and on FastCompany.com.

She is also one of the authors of the following FranklinCovey work sessions: The 5 Choices to Extraordinary Productivity®, Project Management Essentials for the Unofficial Project

Resources Mentioned

Kory Kogon Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Kory, welcome.

Kory Kogon
Thanks for having me, Pete. Great to be here.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m excited to talk about your work, Project Management for the Unofficial Project Manager. I think a lot of people find themselves in that position of the unofficial project manager. Could you paint a picture for us for how that normally shows up at work?

Kory Kogon
Well, in today’s world, we’re knowledge workers, we’re paid to think, to innovate, to create, and execute. And when it really comes down to it, we are making things, things that have a beginning and an end. And as knowledge workers, we just quietly slip into the role of unofficial project managers without the training that official project managers would get. And people just use their talents and skills to push through when there’s actually a better way.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, can you paint a picture for us in terms of how well is that working for us so far, in terms of the state of unofficial project management at work?

Kory Kogon
Well, the state of it is that, generally, 65% of projects fail, and that can include official and unofficial project managers. But more down to earth and real is that wherever I go around the world, or the country, and speak with groups on Zoom or in person, when you ask them why projects fail, they always give the same reasons, that there’s unclear expectations, that there’s no clear communication, that they don’t have the right people in the right roles, that there’s scope creep. It goes on and on and on to this very similar list all the time, everywhere.

And, again, it’s because we’re trying to get projects done by the seat of our pants, and it’s really unfortunate because when we become scarred unofficial project managers, because we all go into these projects sort of expecting those bad outcomes, and so from an engagement point of view, where are we when it comes to projects? So, that’s a little bit of the landscape that that we need to push through. And like I said before, there’s just a better way when people become aware of just the organic nature of us being unofficial project managers.

Pete Mockaitis
And this 65% figure, I really want to dig into that because, I mean, how precisely are we defining a project has failed?

Kory Kogon
You know, it could be it was off budget or it didn’t meet its scope. So, again, it’s a wide berth to say that, you know, to pose that number. I don’t have the empirical data for you exactly, but it’s an estimate out there.

Pete Mockaitis
I guess what I was thinking is like, if the project is to start a profitable business, I would expect, a vast majority of the, in fact, would fail. Although, if the project is to, you know – why is this so hard to think of an example? – redesign our loan approval process is the project. That feels very much like, “Okay, that’s within the control of an organization to do that.”

So, you’re not aware if it’s like entrepreneurial, sort of risky market-facing factors are at play within the 65% figure, or it’s pretty much, no, it’s just, this could have been done, but it didn’t happen because of those very ordinary means by which things fall apart?

Kory Kogon
No, I think it’s a little bit of both. There are all kinds of forces that affect everything so it’s a little bit of both. And those outside forces might be constants that we need to deal with. So, I think there’s a lot in there. I don’t want to say, “Oh, well, you know, if people clarified expectations, it would be 100%.” It’s very rare to even get to 100%. So, even if we took 65 and reduce that to 40 or 30, the return on investment to anybody would be amazing.

Even an entrepreneur starting a business and gets slowed down because things aren’t progressing as fast, so they couldn’t get the money fast enough. Or the building, I mean think about constructing a building for a business and when it gets slowed down, so even if we don’t into that number a little bit, regardless of the factors, the return on investment is pretty huge.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. So, then, I’d love to get your perspective on, from all your research and work here, what is the top thing that makes a huge difference and yet is done so infrequently in terms of ensuring project success?

Kory Kogon
The top thing, again not empirically, but just from our experience and what we hear a lot is unclarified expectations. And, again, you could be running the gamut of, “Is this a solo entrepreneur starting a business that has this project in their mind so they’re clear on their own expectations?” But even then, I can see traps along the way versus a 10,000-person organization where they’re working on projects and have big key stakeholders at the executive level, and everybody’s pulling in a different direction.

But I will say, clarified expectations. So, even an entrepreneur who is starting a business, if they are like, “Well, maybe we should do it this way,” or “Maybe we should do it that way,” and they don’t come to clarity to say, “Okay, we’ve got this clarity. Now let’s execute,” it really will step them back. So, I would say that is one of the biggest ones out there around clarifying the expectations or clarifying the scope of the project, first and foremost, is probably key.

I’ve also seen in some of the bigger organizations very painful scenarios of project managers trying to jockey the politics, and this key stakeholder wants this, and the other one wants that, and trying to do a project without that clarity, and it’ll kill you in the end.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, Kory, it sounds like you’ve got a story in mind. Please, tell us a dastardly tale of unclarified expectations and what went awry.

Kory Kogon
Well, one story, one person that I talked to, it was just really amazing. She was talking about the project that they were working on, and it was a big team of people, and they’re four months into spending a ton on it, and a stakeholder showed up, and said, “No, no, that’s not the direction. We need to go in this direction,” and that person had a lot of influence, and they had to stop the whole project.

And once you stop a project like that, they had people that left the organization because of that, and trying to find the money to redo all of it just brought everything to a standstill. But it was more, you sort of had to be there, the pain on this woman’s face as she was telling this story of failure, and I think also, it’s not just that they didn’t clarify expectations.

It’s that how it makes people feel when, because no matter what, even though it was an outside force, if you will, to change something, all the good work that this person and the teams had done to get there suddenly went away, and it makes you feel like you don’t know what you’re doing, and there’s nothing worse than people feel like they don’t know what they’re doing, and I think that leads to shame, which is another terrible thing that people have to deal with.

So, the cost is not just financial. It’s social, emotional, all from this idea of, “Can we just get clear up front on what this project is?” And if we’re all clear, in this new world of agility, as we go, we’ll get feedback, we’ll do it in a measured modern kind of way, so we make the project better and better, to apply and supply the value that it was meant to supply from the beginning.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And what are some of your favorite best practices, or key questions, or means by which we can get outstanding clarity right from the get-go?

Kory Kogon
So, the first thing is to understand you do need to ask questions. It’s amazing to me, Pete, how many people will say to me, “Well, I’m afraid to ask questions because they’re going to think I’m stupid or something, that I don’t know my job.” I’ve been in executive leadership for many years. If you don’t come and ask me questions about a project that I’m involved with, you’re making a big mistake because then you’re trying to read my mind, and I will come to you later and say, “Well, wait a minute, what about this?”

So, best you come to me and ask questions and don’t worry that I’m going to look at you and think you’re not smart. That’s totally not true. So, that’s number one, is get that, “ I do need to ask questions of key stakeholders.” The second thing is, when you go to ask questions, is that you go with a clear outcome of the project. So, it’s not, “Hey, well, you know, senior leadership says it’s important, Kory, so I need you to tell me what you want.” I don’t have time for that.

But if you came to me and said, “Listen, from what I know so far, that this is going to increase our bottom line by 10%, or it’s going to engage our people in a way they haven’t been engaged before, so we cut retention,” now we’re talking, now I have some concrete things that I can go on, so I will make the time to listen to your questions.

And so, the last thing I’ll say on questions is make sure you come prepared with a couple of really good – we call this the question funnel – open questions, meaning, “So, tell me, based on what we know, why is this project important to you?” Detailed questions, so that when somebody says, “Well, it’s important because senior leadership said so,” that instead of like, “Okay, fine,” knowing that’s not a real answer, we can ask a detailed question of, “So, what does important mean to you? What does that mean to the organization?” and you drill into it.

And then a closed question, meaning confirm what you heard. When somebody says, “Well, I think we’re going to put $100,000 towards the budget.” Don’t run off and go, “Yay, we have $100,000.” You want to confirm it and say, “So, you said $100,000. Are we final on that? Do we need some meeting on that? What’s the next step to make sure that that’s the budget?” So, we close it up and get confirmation.

So, those three, the question funnel, in addition to make sure you don’t feel that it’s silly asking questions, and having a good outcome so somebody pays attention to you, and then these questions, you’ll be really set to clarify expectations.

Pete Mockaitis
I like the visual of a funnel there in terms of open at the top, it makes sense at the beginning that we can be a little more exploratory, broad, expansive, make sure we don’t constrict too early. And then, yes, at the end, making sure that we’ve got what we need, those key bits of finality and closure. Can you share with us any particular specific questions that you have found often open up oceans of clarity when folks take the boldness to go ahead and put them forward?

Kory Kogon
Well, it depends on the situation. I don’t know if there’s any magic bullet, and one that I said before, knowing what we know about the project, “How do you see its importance to our team, to the organization?” That, I think, is a main question. One of the questions that I said to you before, this idea of confirmation to knock out assumptions, which are killing a lot of organizations, because everybody assumes they know what somebody else is thinking.

And so, just every step of the way, without being obnoxious, “So, is that how we want to move forward? Is that how you want me to write that down?” So, just really making sure we have the confirmation. And any question that will lead to a more measurable outcome. So again, in that detailed question, “But what will success look like for us?” So, I should be able to answer that and other people should be able to answer that for you. If we’re doing an event to improve customer satisfaction, how will we measure the outcomes of this? That is key to an agile project management world we live in.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, I think that’s huge in terms of moving past fuzzy language to concrete language, like, “We really want to delight our customers,” or, “We want to grow. We want this to be a big opportunity,” is okay. So, is any positive incremental amount growth, and thusly we get to celebrate victory, and what did you mean by a lot, “Oh, wow, your ‘a lot’ is way, way bigger than my ‘a lot’ assumption”? And so, driving to that extra level of confirmation can really be quite eye-opening.

Kory Kogon
It can, and this whole notion of squeezing out assumptions. So, I think a key principle for project management, which is a little bit out of, not left field, but I think will be of interest to everybody, is this notion that words are only the code by which I’m describing the picture in my mind. And so, when somebody says, to your point, Pete, “Well, make sure this is done in a quality way.” “Okay, boss, got it,” and off I go, and I do things in what I think is a quality way, and I come back and show Pete, and Pete’s like, “What the heck is that? That’s not what I meant.”

But the word quality goes back to those detailed questions. The word quality means something different in your mind than it does in my mind. And as a good project manager, if I understand that principle around language, quality, trust, any words you can think of, feast, any kind of word, we call it a fat word, because there are so many different meanings that it’s imperative that people ask questions to make sure we are on the same wavelength, “What do you mean by quality?” And you continue to drill down until you feel, without being obnoxious, but until you feel like you’re on the same wavelength with the person you’re talking to. That’s a life lesson, not just a project management lesson.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, certainly.

Kory Kogon
As I know from my own home.

Pete Mockaitis
And what’s funny is the word quality, it seems like, “Of course, we all like quality,” but that could actually be pretty dangerous. Like, Kory, if you tell me, you want something to be the high quality, I mean, watch out, because I’m thinking, “Okay, high quality means this is the best in the world in its category, or at least top 1%. Therefore, it’s probably going to take dozens or hundreds of hours to execute.” It’s like, “Oh no, no, no! When I said quality, I don’t want you to go deep into the land of obsessive, hardcore craftsmanship. I just mean it needs to not break.” It’s like, “Oh, okay, quality.” I’m glad I asked.

Kory Kogon
Yeah, exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
Alrighty. Well, so that’s one huge piece of failure there, is unclarified expectations, and we fix that by clarifying, asking a lot of questions, being bold, getting super clear. What is another major cause of failure and the antidote?

Kory Kogon
Well, I’ll give you sort of this overarching mindset that we say that project success equals value, plus people, plus process. And without getting into the details, the Project Management Institute updated their standard to one that more resembled the agile world, which means, “Are we bringing full value to the customer? And how are we being agile along the way to get there?”

So, we actually updated our mindset from people plus process equals project success, to value plus people, plus process, equals project success. So, to your question, the people part and the leadership part, much failure comes because project managers, in some cases, never intended to be leaders. In some organizations, they chose a technical track or a genius track, not a leadership development track, and a lot of people just don’t get it that people do the work. So, “Am I somebody that is inspiring people to want to play on my team and will play to win?”

So, with that, there are five behaviors. We said, out of all the leadership stuff out there, because if you think about it, Pete, when you think about the failure list – lack of clear expectations, lack of communication, wrong people in the wrong job, scope creep, all of that stuff – and then we’re saying, “Okay, yippee, we have this project to do,” and the people that are doing it are living inside that failure list unless a leader is its own failure, unless a leader knows how to pull them out of that, using a good process, and inspiring people to want to give their best.

And so, out of all the leadership behaviors out there, all the leadership development that people can take, we’ve narrowed it down and said, “You know what? For this, for now, if they just master five behaviors, that will go a long way to inspiring their team to want to do the work and want to win.” And those behaviors are: demonstrate respect, listen first, clarify expectations, extend trust, and practice accountability. And those five behaviors come from what we call the 13 Behaviors of High Trust Leaders. So, just those five.

And I always say our parents taught us to do those things, right? And when you’re under pressure, listen, I’ve been in leadership for many years. I’m born and raised in New York City. You probably can tell from my accent. I move fast and hard, and my default nature is just, “Let’s go get them.” And under pressure, not that I don’t want to respect people, but I have to be really careful, because my demeanor, I live in Arizona, my demeanor can be one that’s really to the point and a little gruff from time to time, and people could feel like I’m not respecting them.

So, when I’m under pressure of a big project, I really need to take a deep breath and think about it. Listening first also can go out of the window when you are under pressure. It’s like, “Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I just need you to do it the way I said so,” which is I always say it’s so much easier to be a bad leader than a good one because I have to really think about being good, kind of thing.

So, all of these, clarifying expectations, for the team member, not just the project, but it’s not just, “Pete, just do this task with blinders on.” It’s, “Pete, let me explain. For you to do this task means that it’s the piece of the puzzle that’s going to make sure this all happens.” Like, “Whoa, okay, now I get what my task is as a contribution, not just a thing to do.”

Extend trust. People struggle with delegation. You got to let the team members do the work. And then practice accountability. If I am not a model of accountability before I hold you accountable, and if I let you show up late three days in a row, and the team sees that there’s no accountability, everything’s going to fall apart. So, those five behaviors are key to a project manager leading a project and staying off some of the failure list.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now you also mentioned you’ve got five project phases: the scope, plan, engage, track, adapt, and close. Can you walk us through those and some of the best practices there? It sounds like we got a little bit of goodness on the scope side. Any more you’d add to that?

Kory Kogon
I would. A key thing that people struggle with that they should be aware of, I mentioned, well, first of all, is how you get access to stakeholders, and I explained a little bit about that before, is you’ve got to have the right story to make sure people will make time for you. But then the other thing in scoping is making sure that you are able to get key stakeholders on the same page. That when they have differing opinions, are you good enough using those behaviors to get them in a room and help negotiate getting clarity on the scope? So that’s a key thing as well.

And I’ll also say within that first one around scoping is identifying key stakeholders. And it’s interesting because we give a little thinking tool called the key stakeholder dance, which is, “Who makes the decisions? Who has the authority? Who has the need?” Those are all the signers. The last two, C and E, is, “Who has the connection? And who is the energy?” And those are not signers. Those are people, like connections, I have people out in the field that they have so much influence in the organization that when I have somebody with negative energy or there’s politics, I can call them to the table and they can help smooth things over.

So, a lot of times that’s a big takeaway for people to really go back and revisit their key stakeholder list, and say, “Did I forget those people?” Because I usually go for just the signers and the ones we know. So, that’s scope. In plan, there’s really two key things to do. One is, “How do I identify and get my arms around risk?” so risk management. And people are working on a lot of projects at the same time. So, if we identify 10 or 12 risks, can we manage a million things? So, how do we prioritize risks and just focus on the ones that are really key?

And the second part of plan is the project plan, which is always everybody’s favorite part because they just tremble at the idea of a Gantt chart. And the interesting thing is it becomes this great visual scoreboard that once you know some project management principles, you’d be amazed at how easy a Gantt chart can be and how strategic it can become to your entire project and your team. So, that’s a little bit about a plan.

Scope and plan together, make up, “I’m ready to go, and now we just need to execute.” So, I’ll pause there, see if you have any questions.

Pete Mockaitis
Sure thing. So, with Gannt charts, for those who are not familiar, can you describe this life-changing magic and what makes it so amazing?

Kory Kogon
Yeah, and people will say, “Kory, get a life. You get so excited about a Gantt chart.” And sometimes they’ll say, “Demystify success for the unofficial project manager,” because it is a demystification. So, a lot of people, when we ask them, what do they used to you know plan a project or to track it, and most times, and we do poll after poll after poll the, answer always is in the majority, Excel. And then some people are using some things like Monday.com. I mean, there’s a bunch of things out there, Google Sheets and all that kind of stuff.

And they use Excel, and it’s interesting because the Gantt chart program, so think, and I don’t represent them, Microsoft Project or Smartsheet on the Google side, and I have no allegiance to any of them, but essentially, they are Excel and project management principles included. So, here’s the big demystification, which I love, is when you understand the concept of dependencies, that one task must get done before the other task gets started, as an example, and you tie those things together, the software will allow you to tie those things together, and you learn the difference between work hours and duration.

So, work hours is, “Oh, yes, Pete, I can get that list to you, or the customer list together, in four hours, no problem.” Really? You have seven other projects going on, your team is busy, also somebody’s on PTO, and really the duration is two or three days to get those four hours of work done. So, if you input dependencies and duration in your task list, then you’re going to end up with what’s called the critical path. Another terrifying term to so many people.

The critical path is a wonderful thing. The critical path will light up in a Gantt chart and show you the shortest amount of time it’s going to take to get those tasks done that must be done on exactly the way you have them in order to finish the project right here. It lights up. So, suddenly, you have this magical strategic tool that shows you how this project needs to go, and how you might need to put your best people on critical path items because they got to be done right then and there.

So, it’s not for the faint of heart and it’s not for like brand-new people training. You want to make sure that you have the right people on critical path items. And if a critical path item is in danger, it allows you to think about, “Okay, Mary, you know what? You’re on a task that isn’t so critical. Can you help Pete out because we really got to get this done?” So, it just turns an Excel spreadsheet into a magical strategic project management tool that’s not as hard as everybody thinks.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And so, are you saying that you’d recommend, if you’re using Excel, try Project or something else? Or are you saying, “Get the magical plugins that make Excel do this for you right away”?

Kory Kogon
I’m not that good to know if Excel has the plugins, but I would say, and we say in our courses too, we’re not here to make experts of Gantt charts. And we’ll say it in the book as well, give it a try. So maybe it’s Microsoft Project, there’s a lot of online programs out there. Give something a try. Take a deep breath. Learn those principles, and then see how it works for you.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think a cool thing to highlight in terms of those principles and the notion of the critical path is that there are some activities that we can do serially. Okay, not serially, but parallelly. We could do some things at the same time, and it’s all good. Team A is working on some marketing stuff, which they can do before Team B does the engineering to make the thing actually exist. That’s possible. We don’t have to wait until we could actually see it and touch the thing in order to start getting some marketing things together.

However, when it comes to photographing the thing, it needs to exist first in order for it to be honestly photographed. And so, that is how you really start to see that differentiation between, “Are things done in parallel or serially?” and then the stack of things that are dependent on the prior things extend outward horizontally to become the critical path on a chart. And so, it really is pretty eye-opening. And as you go, “Oh, well, we can get started on all these things right now, but we absolutely cannot start this until that’s done, so we really, really, really got to make sure that this piece doesn’t get delayed here.”

Kory Kogon
A lot of times we just intuitively think about that as unofficial process, “Oh, well, you know, yeah, we need to do that, but we’ll check with them, and we’ll probably get that on Tuesday.” This makes it very specific. And you said it beautifully, things can work in parallel and these dependencies are finish to start, start to finish. So, there’s a few different ones in there that link them together.

I always like to talk about Thanksgiving in the United States dinner is turkey, you know, turkey dinner. And when you think about cooking, how all that works, you sort of intuitively know, “Well, I need to put the turkey in four hours ahead, but the potatoes need to go in ten minutes before the turkey is ready.” So, it’s very similar. We’ve been doing it intuitively, but when we get it down into a chart and let the chart help us manage, it’s really amazing.

Pete Mockaitis
Certainly, and then you start to have some fun thinking about the resources and the true bottlenecks, and it’s like, “Oh, well, this doesn’t even need the oven at all, so easy-peasy. I’ll just use the microwave for that, and away we go.” Okay. Well, so now let’s hear about the engage.

Kory Kogon
Well, that takes us right back to the people part because this is where, if we’ve got scope and plan, and we want to engage, this is where we need to help our people do their work and hold them accountable, so we say inspire shared accountability. And so, if you think about if we’ve got a good, or whatever you’re using, it should be a visual scoreboard, much easier in this day and age because everybody can go online and see what’s what, whether you’re working remote, or hybrid, or whatever. So, really good versus having to bring a chart into a room.

So, everybody has visibility into my well-done, whether it’s a Gantt chart, or however you end up doing it, and what we recommend, and we’re very famous for this at Franklin Covey, is what we call a team accountability session, because people are already rolling their eyes, saying, “Of course, you’re going to tell me to do another meeting.” We work our meetings and our accountability, we like to say, from the bottom up. That this is not about the leader holding the team accountable. It’s about the team wanting to play to win.

So, this team accountability session is maybe a once-a-week meeting, that is not a staff meeting, it’s not an operations meeting. All it is, it’s like, forgive me, using a sports analogy, but like a sports huddle. The team gets together and everybody commits to, “This is exactly what I’m doing this week to make sure this project stays on target.” And the job of the leader in that meeting is to only, what we call, clear the path.

So, everybody comes to this very short 15-minute meeting, of course, depends on how many people you’ve got on the team. Everybody knows where they are, and they are reporting out, “Hey, last week, I said I was going to do this thing, got it, done, moving on. Next week, I have a million things to do, but here’s the one thing I’m going to do to make sure this project stays on task,” and the project manager is in the background clearing the path, “You know what? I can’t get through to facilities, they’re not answering my calls. I can’t get my thing done to get the parking set up.” And so, great, my job as a leader, I’m going to call facilities so you have a clear path to be able to do that, and the meeting is over.

And that is just, so it’s the people are making the commitments to what they’re going to do to keep that project on track, not the leader, and so it creates this engagement by the team and they high-five and they go out. That’s sort of the cadence of accountability that we do. Doesn’t always go perfectly. Lots of times people come to the meeting, “I didn’t get to it.” So, what the leader has to really learn is, “How do I tell Pete? He didn’t do his commitments, and he just announced it in the meeting, how do I let the team know that I’m holding him accountable without embarrassing him in front of everybody else, and turning the team against me at the same time?”
So, there’s a lot of learning that goes into that, and also, “How do I, if somebody is chronic, where they haven’t shown up for three weeks, how do I have a performance conversation with them to understand what’s going on and set it right?” So, the pathway is to engage through this bottom-up team accountability. And I say bottom lovingly, meaning the people who are doing the work get to speak and make the commitments, the leader is behind them. And then, “How do I keep things going because something’s going to give because we’re not perfect?”

Pete Mockaitis
And, Kory, I’d love it for you to give us a demonstration. Indeed, let’s say I show up and I didn’t do the thing, how does one respond in that artful way that you described that checks all the boxes you’re looking to accomplish there?

Kory Kogon
It’s a great question, and I’ll do it with you. So, go ahead, tell me you didn’t do something.

Pete Mockaitis
“Oh, yeah, sorry, no, I didn’t quite finish that one up.”

Kory Kogon
“Thanks, Pete, for letting us know. Can you tell us a little bit about what went…? I’m sure we’re all so busy. What happened?”

Pete Mockaitis
“Yeah, that’s the thing. There’s just been a whole lot going on in a lot of directions, and, yeah, unfortunately, I just didn’t get to that.”

Kory Kogon
“Okay. Well, I get that and, again, I know, I can tell it’s on your face, too, how crazed everybody is. We’re all busy. You made that commitment last week. So, what is it? Is there anything that we can do to help you? Because now we have that commitment and we need your commitment for next week. So, what can I do to help you to make sure that we hit our commitments by the time we come back next week?”

Pete Mockaitis
“Well, yeah, I appreciate the question. I guess it’s just really tricky with my boy, my youngest kid just isn’t sleeping well, and so then the rest of us aren’t sleeping well. And then, I don’t know about you, when I don’t get the sleep, I’m kind of dumber and slower in everything I try to do on a given day. So, I don’t…it’s probably not practical for anyone to show up and tend to the children in my home. So, yeah, I’m kind of drawing a blank.”

Kory Kogon
“Yeah, it sounds a little frustrating. Everybody in this room is really nodding. Everybody has kids. Well, here’s what I would suggest so we don’t hold everybody up. How about you and I take this offline and then we’ll figure something out. Does that sound okay?”

Pete Mockaitis
“Oh, sure thing.”

Kory Kogon
“Okay.” So, if I had gone any further with you, the tension would really rise. Somebody might have said, “Well, you know, I had these three other projects and I couldn’t get to it, and you made the commitment.” So, somebody might have said, “Well, you know what, I couldn’t get to it yesterday. I’ll get to it tomorrow. And here’s my commitment for next week. I’m going to keep it really light, but I can get this done to make sure that…” and we would agree and go on.

But you pushed me to the second part, which is we need to have a performance conversation offline because, had I gone any further with you, like I said, the tension was rising in the room, and it starts to become embarrassing for everybody else.

Pete Mockaitis
Yeah, and they don’t need to hear about you and me troubleshooting a sleeping…

Kory Kogon
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
In terms of just like respectful of their time. But I really do appreciate how you made it clear. And it wasn’t super ominous, like, “You’re going to get a talking to by the principal.” But it was just clear, it’s like, “Okay, that’s not just going to get swept under the rug. Something is going to be done to address that,” and so the team gets that memo. And so, if someone was new, it’s like, “Oh, duly noted, not getting to it doesn’t work here.”

Kory Kogon
Exactly.

Pete Mockaitis
“Okay, message received.”

Kory Kogon
That is the key, that when you do this well and don’t lose the respect of the team, like if it had gone further and we took the gloves off, that’s bad because what will happen is just group dynamics. The group will defend you more than the leader, like, “I can’t believe she’s doing that to Pete here,” that kind of thing. But what does happen, like you said, “I got the memo.”

And that’s the key, is by handling it when it happens somehow, what people are sitting there doing is exactly what you said, they’re like, “Okay, I am never, ever, ever, ever going to put myself in that position of not coming to this meeting without my commitments done,” or “I’m going to let Kory know beforehand so we can work it out.” And that’s the key, that’s accountability. That’s a great thing where people are thinking it up themselves instead of dropping the hammer on them, like, “You will do your stuff,” kind of thing.

Pete Mockaitis
And I think that’s powerful, is that you didn’t need to shout, or be mean, or do name calling, or, like frowny faces. You didn’t have to do any sort of a toxic behavior for it to feel plenty uncomfortable such that I wouldn’t want to do that again. Like, people love to complain about their bosses, nor do I think I could be like, “Can you believe what Kory said to me?” It’s like, “I kind of can. Like, that’s seems kind of like a reasonable response from a leader, even though it sucked for you. Sorry you had to go through that.”

Kory Kogon
Right. And even when you said no frowny face, for me, some of my best friends, I’ll be sitting with them and I’ll get a nudge, and they’ll say, “Talk to your face,” because I could be showing my hand on my face. This whole thing around leadership, and even with these five behaviors, leadership is a choice. And project management, again, we didn’t choose to be people leaders, but if you’re a project manager, you’re leading people, and you have to talk to your face, and you have to be very measured about this and very self-aware, and emotionally intelligent in dealing with people and getting things done.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Thank you. Well, so track, adapt, and close, we might do the quicker version of those.

Kory Kogon
We can, because if you get the first two groups done well, and we’re engaging, then track and adapt, we’ve been doing it all along. Track and adapt is really about the whole agile movement that we did have a scope, not that we want scope creep, but are we building in feedback loops, really listening to people to make sure that we are delivering value on the project? Market forces change, things change out there, and so track and adapt as a team. Do we have the agility to be able to do that? As a leader, am I leading my people in the right way around that?

Close is always so interesting because if you talk to people, one of the things they’ll say is, “Do you have a bunch of projects that never end?” And people will laugh and say, “Ugh, all the time.” So, we got to finish them because it’s easy to start them, hard to finish them. But we finish them and the most important thing, again, remember we want an engaged team, is to have that closing meeting. When I get that meeting notice, I roll my eyes, like, “Ugh, the closing meeting.”

And then when I’m in it, I’m like, “I’m glad we did it,” because the team gets recognized, the key stakeholders are there, and it’s a place where people can share a retrospective, “What went well? What didn’t?” people can voice their concerns, we can celebrate people, and it really sets people up to be even more engaged for the next project. So, that’s track and adapt and close.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, tell me, Kory, anything else you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Kory Kogon
I think what I said, this is not for the faint of heart but it can be done. And whether you are a solo project manager, these principles are in play. Or, if you’re leading a group in a large organization, the same things apply when you put your mind to it. So, I think that’s a final statement on that.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now could you share a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Kory Kogon
Yes, I do have a quote, and that quote is by Dr. Stephen Covey, and it goes to everything that we’ve been saying. And what he said is that, “Fast is slow, and slow is fast.” And I really get on board with that in so many ways as a leader when it comes to projects, when it comes to managing home life, and 30 years in a relationship. Fast is slow. Slow is fast.

If you go too fast on a project, you’re going to pay the price at the end. If you go too fast as a leader trying to get work done and don’t take care of the people, it’s going to slow you down at the end. If you slow down, because I’m sure people on this call, Pete, also were going, “Hey, I don’t have time to scope and I don’t have time to go find other key stakeholders and all of that,” but we call it front loading, and so if you slow down to do the work up front, it’ll speed things up in the end. So that’s my favorite quote.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. And a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Kory Kogon
I’m a fan of Dr. David Rock, who is the founder of the NeuroLeadership Institute, for many years, and I was lucky enough to be able to get a certificate of NeuroLeadership Foundations. So, I love following his work because it’s very, obviously, research-based and has everything to do with how the brain works. And in this world of knowledge work, we have to optimize our brain.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And a favorite tool?

Kory Kogon
A favorite tool, I think it’s interesting, here’s my old school-ness – tables in Word.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, yeah.

Kory Kogon
That is helpful to me because I write so much, and it’s always interesting when I see people write text in Excel, but a table for me is really good. And Notion now is a favorite tool of mine as well.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite book?

Kory Kogon
A favorite book is actually Quiet by Susan Cain, because I am a raging introvert.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And a favorite habit?

Kory Kogon
My favorite habit is walking. I like to walk. Again, going back to the brain, that I work really hard, like so many people do, and continuously, and that is not a good thing, even in the day-to-day. You need to take breaks, and that break will increase your productivity by a certain amount. So, when I take a break, I like to go out and walk, and on the weekends, I live in the desert, so it’s a great habit to help me think. And a lot of times, I’ll come in my office, look at my computer, read something, and then go take a walk to let it synthesize.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Kory Kogon
We would point them to, you know, you can get the updated version of Project Management for the Unofficial Project Manager at any of the booksellers, Amazon, etc. You can find me on LinkedIn, and you can go to www.franklincovey.com to see this and all of the other things that we have up there on people development.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be honest about their jobs?

Kory Kogon
Remember that it’s about the people, number one, if you’re a leader; and number two, regardless of your role, that you have every opportunity to work in your circle of influence if you let go of some of the things that you can’t do anything about. It’s a tough time in the world right now and in the workplace, and so if you just really take a deep breath, count to 10, and focus on things that you have control over, you’ll find that it’s easier to get through the day-to-day with a pretty good contribution at the end.

Pete Mockaitis
Awesome. Well, Kory, thank you. I wish you much luck in all your projects.

Kory Kogon
Well, thank you, and thanks for taking the time with me today, Pete.

927: Fixing One-on-One Meetings Improves (almost) Everything with Dr. Steven Rogelberg

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Dr. Steven Rogelberg explains why one-on-one meetings are so critical—and shares best practices for both managers and employees.

You’ll Learn:

  1. Why having more one-on-ones actually saves time
  2. How to create a meeting agenda that works
  3. The right way to ask your manager for help 

About Steven

Dr. Steven G. Rogelberg, an organizational psychologist, holds the title of Chancellor’s Professor at UNC Charlotte for distinguished national, international and interdisciplinary contributions. He is an award-winning teacher and recipient of the very prestigious Humboldt Award for his research on meetings. Adam Grant has called Steven the “world’s leading expert on how to fix meetings”.

Dr. Rogelberg’s previous book, The Surprising Science of Meetings: How You Can Lead Your Team to Peak Performance (Oxford) has been on over 25 “best of” lists including being recognized by the Washington Post as the #1 leadership book to watch for.

He was the inaugural winner of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Humanitarian Award and just finished his term as President of SIOP, the largest professional organization in the world for I-O psychology.

Resources Mentioned

Dr. Steven Rogelberg Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis

Steven, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Thank you. It’s really great to be here.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, I’m stoked to be chatting about your book Glad We Met: The Art and Science of 1:1 Meetings. But first, I have to hear from you, can you think of a particularly transformational or consequential one-on-one meeting in your own life and what made it so special?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Yeah, it was really the experience of leading one with one of my directs, and just seeing how it impacted her. So, she came into the one-on-one in a really bad place, and then, by the end of it, she was in a different place. She was kind of charged up to address the challenges that she was confronting, and I was just grateful. It feels great to help one of your directs who is struggling.

Pete Mockaitis

Totally. And can you tell us, broadly speaking, and not just in your own experience there but in your research and across workplaces, really what’s at stake if we have one-on-one meetings go amazingly versus okay?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Well, the research is clear and powerful. Leaders who do one-on-one meetings well, the gains are tremendous. We see it positively affecting employee experience, employee engagement, even retention of your top talent. From a team perspective, there’s a strong linkage between good one-on-ones and team performance, inclusion efforts are enhanced, and the sweet composite of all this is, is that this is really good for the manager. Because as your people, and as the team thrives, it only reflects well on you. So, one-on-ones are one of these activities that everyone benefits from.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, as you did your research, tell me, did anything really surprised you, or strike you, or seem shocking?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

I thought it was really interesting that when we surveyed employees about how often they’d want a one-on-one meeting with their manager, well, let me throw it back at you, Pete. What do you think? What do you think the typical responses? How often do people want one-on-ones with their manager?

Pete Mockaitis

More than they’re getting is the theme, I would say.

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

That’s a really good response. So, the typical response was, “Weekly.” And what was so interesting is that more senior employees actually desired even more one-on-ones than more junior employees. So, counter to generational stereotypes, we see a reverse of that.

Pete Mockaitis

Oh, that’s right. That is a great reversal of generational stereotypes

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

I think that everyone wants to be seen, and one-on-one meetings are that opportunity to be seen. And I think with the senior-level folks, they know with their experience how critical it is to have this contact with their manager that really focuses on success, alignment, removing barriers and obstacles, so they get it. And because they get it, they want it.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, they know it matters and they want it all the more. So, that’s what we want. Well, what are we getting?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Well, the cadence out there is very variable, some managers are meeting with their people once a week. Many others are doing it once a month. That’s very common. Still, others do it quarterly, which is basically a no-meeting cadence. But more concerning is our research generally shows that around 50% of one-on-ones are rated sub-optimally, so we’re not realizing their full potential.

And then, Pete, the thing that’s crazy is that if you surveyed these two individuals leaving the meeting room, the manager thinks it went much better than the direct. They seem to have a little bit of a blind spot.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, that’s quite a confluence of forces, a perfect storm here. People want lots of one-on-one meetings, they’re not getting those one-on-one meetings. When they happen, they’re usually disappointing, and yet, the manager thinks that things are going just fine and dandy all at the same time.

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Exactly. Pete, you literally just nailed why I wrote this book, it was to address that statement exactly.

Pete Mockaitis

Okay. So, lay it on us then, Steven, if we are hurting on this dimension, what are the tops things we can do to improve it?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

So, some of the common mistakes is people don’t prepare, they don’t try to find this connective tissue between one-on-ones, and that’s really the wonderful value of one-on-ones is that you can create this connective tissue and to build momentum.

They’re not doing them at the right cadence. They are making the meeting more about the manager and less about the direct. They can’t help themselves. They talk more than the direct, which is one of the greatest predictors of one-on-one ineffectiveness. They don’t have a plan of action. They don’t involve the direct in creating that plan of action. They don’t kind of create an environment that’s psychologically safe, so the directs don’t come in there and actually share what’s important to them. They don’t, at the end of the one-on-one, recap what was agreed upon. And they don’t follow through on the various commitments.

So, those are some of the plagues that happen, but there are so many more. We could go into cancellations, for example. One of the biggest mistakes that managers do is they cancel these one-on-ones frequently. And think about what a signal that is to your employees, that basically you have this activity that’s about them, but if something else comes up that’s pressing, you cancel. You immediately lower the importance of your employees.

And what we found in the research is a much better practice is if you have to cancel, move up the meeting as opposed to move it back even if you only meet with that person for 10 minutes. But that type of a behavior, as opposed to being a negative signal, it becomes a positive signal, that no matter what, you’re going to find that time for your people.

Pete Mockaitis

That’s huge. And it’s so funny because it does happen all the time, I’ve seen it, and I’ve been guilty, I guess, on both sides. And it’s so interesting, I think the manager’s perspective is maybe something like, “Ah, well, this is something within my control, my people. I have some flexibility and leeway to move this around,” versus, “Super big deal client. That? Oh, no, I have to bend over backwards and deal with them, pronto. Like, I have no choice in that matter,” versus this meeting with my people, “Hey, man, we’re cool. Yeah, we’ll could shift that around. No problem.”

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

That’s right.

Pete Mockaitis

But that’s not so cool.

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

It’s not. It’s one of those things. People go through their workdays, they’re looking at signals, signals about their values, signals of their importance, signals about who their manager really is, and we have to be careful. Like, sometimes we say one thing but our signals and behavior suggests something very different.

And so, one of the things I really get into in the book is that this is not an optional activity. This is a core requirement of leadership, and the alternative title for the book that I played with is “This is the one meeting that should not be an email,” because this is a stage for leadership. This is where leadership really happens.

Now, we’ve all heard the old adage that people don’t leave bad jobs, they leave bad bosses. And one-on-ones are this opportunity to display awesome leadership, to foster these meaningful relationships with your people, to help them on their path and on their journey. And by doing so, all boats are raised.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Now, previously, you used the term connective tissue. Just to make sure we don’t lose that, what precisely does that mean?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

So, basically, one-on-ones really move to the next level when each one-on-one kind of connects with a past one-on-one. So, let’s say that you and I are having a one-on-one, Pete, and as part of it, it emerges that you are struggling with conflict management types of tasks, that it really brings you down, it drains you, it just takes this really big toll. So, we spend some time talking about it, we share some resources, what have you.

Well, at our next one-on-one, if I start the one-on-one by saying, “Hey, Pete, I know you’re working on some of the conflict management stuff. How’s that been going for you?” that conveys that I’ve been listening, that I care, that I’m tracking these things. So, to the extent that the story, the story of your career, the story of your success continues, it just becomes a much more powerful conversation. It’s like imagine a relationship with a friend who completely forgets everything that you both talked about last time. That friendship would not thrive.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Well, Steven, it seems like a huge part of this value and goodness can be unlocked simply by deciding, “Okay, this is a priority. I’m going to make the time. I’m not going to shift the meetings around. I’m going to take the time to thoughtfully prepare. I’m going to listen.” So, let’s say that someone is committed, they’ve got the will. What are some of the practices that even then they might overlook?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

So, one of the things is that I found it pretty surprising. When we were looking at some of the design factors around these, and I wasn’t sure about the importance of an agenda for one-on-ones. And it only happens around 50% of the time, but what the research showed is that when there was an agenda, but a lightweight agenda, those one-on-ones seem to excel much greater.

And so, when we think about what that agenda could look like, I want to share a couple approaches that seem to be most well received. One is the listing approach where you tell your direct, “Come to the one-on-one with a list of topics that you want to talk about. I’ll create a list as well but, please, know my list is secondary. I’m only going to bring up my list if it measures with yours or if we have time.”

“Also, when you’re creating your list, I want you to think big, small, long term, short term, you, your team, your organization,” because we want the employee to do a broader scale when they’re creating their list. So, that’s the listing approach, and that would be a great thing for a manager to facilitate. And the more you involve the direct in creating this process, the better.

The second approach is called the core-question approach, and this is where, with your direct, you basically identify four or five core questions that form the foundation of the one-on-one. For example, “What obstacles are you experiencing and how can I help you?” So, you create these questions together, and then the direct has the ability to really guide the meeting in lots of different ways.

Now, in both of these approaches, there’s a few things to keep in mind. One is we don’t want these meetings to turn into a status update, fall into a status update trap where all we talk about is, “What’s going on in that project? What’s going on in that project? What’s going on in that project?” because that is not truly a meeting for the direct. So, therefore, we want to make sure that we rotate questions over time.

It might be the case that we even dedicate certain amounts of time each one of these one-on-ones for a longer horizon career-based discussion. That’s totally fine. So, we want to make sure we’re flexible. We want to ask good questions but we even want to think about the response options associated with them, and let me give you an example, and maybe this might also fall into your category of surprise.

So, a very common question is, “How are you?” Well, it sounds like a reasonably good question. Sadly, it doesn’t work. When you ask someone “How are you?” they typically have automatic responses, “I’m fine,” “Pretty good,” “Great.” It doesn’t really tell you much. But if we changed the response options, if we asked the individual, “I’m interested in how you are but I want you to let me know, on a scale from one to ten, with one being horrible, ten being great, how are you showing up today?”

Now, you get responses of fives, of sixes, of sevens. Now, you have something to work with. You can explore it. You can understand it. So, we need to think about these questions. We want to have really interesting, important, relevant questions that your direct is really strongly informing. And then it’s about good facilitation, good engagement, asking lots of questions, “Tell me more about this,” “What are your thoughts about it?” because we, ultimately, want to give the gift of communication to the direct.

But I will say this and then I’ll pause, is that it is hard. The research has shown that people talk a lot because it activates the same parts of the brain as good food. So, we talk a lot because it feels kind of good, and we need to give that gift to someone else, namely the direct, for this one-on-one to truly shine.

Pete Mockaitis

Great perspectives here. And I love it we jumped right into some very precise practices. Maybe take a step back. What should be our mindset, our underlying goal, our approach, like, “I am doing this one-on-one in order to blank. Therefore, I will do it in the following style or way”?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

When rolling out one-on-ones, it’s really important to tie it to values, and we did this. If you ask managers about what they value, and you look at organization value statements, they are basically shouting one-on-ones. You invariably will see value such as helping others, supporting, leveraging team, all these things. Well, one-on-one is a manifestation of those values.

So, when you’re rolling this out to your folks, you want it to be about values, and that you are committed to their growth and their success, and you’re engaging in one-on-ones to basically live these values. And you’re going to be nimble, you’re going to keep changing these up based on their feedback, their ideas because you want them to have this large shaping influence for this to truly work.

And it’s constantly reminding yourself that this meeting is not for you. This is that one time where you are just fully focused on what’s on the mind of the directs. As a manager, you have power, you can meet with your direct anytime you want. You can send an email asking, “Hey, what’s going on with this project?” You can do that in an asynchronous document. There’s lots of mechanisms for you to have your needs met. This is just your mechanism to make sure their needs are being met.

And when we think about their needs, it’s not just their practical and tactical needs, but it’s their personal needs, the need to feel respected and trusted. These are fundamental kind of human needs. And when the one-on-one can address both of those sets of needs, then the direct leaves the one-on-one feeling pretty good. It doesn’t mean that they’re going to leave there with a big smile on their face because, who knows, maybe you talked about really hard stuff but at least they’ll feel truly seen.

Pete Mockaitis

Can you share, with these needs, is there a sort of taxonomy, or set of key categories, or top needs that should really be top of mind as we’re trying to deliver on these in the one-on-ones?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Love it. I provide a taxonomy in the book, and I lined up questions for each one of them, because you’re raising such a key issue. Really, the types of needs could be around the individual’s work, it could be the obstacles to their success. So, if we want to think about it as levels, so they have needs around their individual work, there could be needs around the team, there could be needs around the organization, better understanding organizational strategy, organizational priorities, organizational communications.

So, you have this individual, team, organization, and then you have the time horizon associated with each of them, they’re short term and long term. And in each of those boxes, that’s where you have those practical needs, and then underlying that are those personal needs, those psychological experience of the conversation. And those things together is really what a complete one-on-one is.

Now, with that said, you can’t do everything in these one-on-ones. You can only do so much. If your one-on-one is 20-25 minutes, which is okay if that’s what you need to do, we want quality over quantity. And if it turns out that the direct just wants to focus on one particular issue or one particular need, so be it. If that’s what’s on their mind, we want to go with it. We will remind them that, “Hey, I know you want to talk about some other things. It looks like we’re not going to get to them. Is that okay with you?”

So, again, we’re constantly signaling, “This is your meeting.” And because it’s their meeting, they can choose to spend as much time on any particular topic that they so desire.

Pete Mockaitis

Well, let’s shift gears for a moment, and let’s say you’re not the manager. You are the direct report who would like to have one-on-ones with more frequency, or you’re having the one-on-ones and they’re not hitting the mark. How do you recommend we show some initiative, some proactive shaping to get what we’re after here?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

So, how I frame it in my content is really it takes two to tango, each party does have responsibilities. While the manager has the most responsibilities, the direct does, too. And in our research, we’ve identified 10 key behaviors that directs have, and we don’t have time to go into all of them but let me share a few.

So, first of all, you can’t get what you need unless you know what you need. And so, before that one-on-one, the direct actually has to really think, really, really think about what their challenges, issues, problems are, needs are. And that takes a little bit of thought. And so many times, directs go into these one-on-ones not doing that. And by doing so, they’re violating the spirit of the one-on-one, and the void, the gap will be filled but with managers’ needs. So, know what you need, that’s first.

Second, don’t be afraid to ask for help. Asking for help is critical to human success but the research generally shows that there’s two types of help-seeking behavior. There’s autonomous help-seeking behavior and dependent. Now, dependent help-seeking is really where you ask the other party to solve your problem. Autonomous help-seeking is really about acquiring information or insights so you can solve your problem yourself.

An autonomous help-seeking is associated with long-term success; dependent is not. So, when you go in there, you know what you need, you’re asking for help in an autonomous way, you’re getting ideas, you’re listening to feedback, you’re checking yourself to not be defensive, you’re engaging in really good rapport behaviors because, who knows, maybe your manager is not good at establishing rapport so you’re jumping in to make sure there is good rapport, and you’re expressing gratitude.

You might even offer help to your manager because one of the things we know about help behavior is when you offer help to other people, they tend to offer help back to you. So, the direct has an active role to making these things truly work. But in so many regards, the direct is going to look at the signals, the signals of what the manager is doing and not doing, and those signals are really going to drive how seriously they enter into that one-on-one.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Steven, tell me, anything else critical you want to make sure to cover before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

I think there’s a few things that I’ll just kind of throw out there. One-on-ones are truly an essential activity, especially in a more distributive workforce. Everyone is craving feeling seen, and one-on-ones are the mechanism. I also want to put out there that one-on-ones are an investment of time that actually saves you time.

Namely, what has generally been found is that when you have these regular one-on-ones with your folks, you tend to get less spontaneous interruptions because people seem to save their issues. Furthermore, because one-on-ones elevate the direct’s performance, there’s less time spent on rework. Furthermore, because when one-on-ones are done well, employees are more engaged and they’re less likely to leave the organization.

So, the point being is that you have many managers who say, “I just don’t have time.” Well, the fact is this truly is going to make time. And one of the things I do in the book is I talk about other areas where you can drop activities to find time but this is just not one of them. This is a core activity of being a leader.

And then I want to say one other thing, which I think you might get a kick out of. The core elements of the book really lays out, it gives the manager choices. So, I’ve identified all these evidence-based techniques that can make these better, but I don’t prescribe. I don’t say, “Do A then B, then C,” because the science doesn’t align with that. This is also why I stress both the art and the science.

So, you know your values, you know your people, so you have choices, and you could take these choices and make them work for you. And there’s another interesting application of all this. One-on-ones could actually be done with your children. And I know that sounds crazy, and I’m not at all suggesting you have these rigid calendar holds with your kids, but the fact is a lot of the core elements of one-on-ones do apply to these familial relationships.

It’s so often that parents don’t actually truly talk to their child on the child’s terms, really exploring what’s on their minds, and just finding that dedicated space. And clinicians have been talking about this for a long time that when a parent does a lot of these same practices with their kids, it builds better relationships, more self-efficacy for them, and they thrive. So, I think that what’s cool about the book is that it’s not only good for your career, whether you’re a leader or a direct, but you can apply it to these other contexts.

Pete Mockaitis

You know, Steven, that’s powerful. And I recently asked my five-year-old son, “What do I do with you that makes you feel the most loved by me?” And he said, “When we have Dada-Johnny time, one-on-one.” And that’s powerful because it’s just like for the manager, it’s very easy to not do that in the midst of “This house is a mess, and there’s two other siblings crying out for attention.” So, it’s like you really got to conscientiously have to stop the world, and say, “No, this is what we’re doing right now.”

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

That’s right.

Pete Mockaitis

“And me and Johnny are chatting, and no one else is allowed in the room. That’s what we’re doing now.”

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Oh, man, Pete, that is a beautiful story, by the way, and you just nailed it. That’s just a great example. It’s just as a young human to an old human, we all just want to feel seen. The thought of people taking an interest in us is so incredibly meaningful. And if we want to elevate work, people, teams, and humanity more broadly, we need to make time for these conversations.

Pete Mockaitis

Beautiful. Well, now could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

I like the quote, “Living well is the best revenge.”

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And a favorite book?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

There’s this book, and I don’t know the author, it’s called Postmortal. And, basically, it’s this dystopian novel that gets to a point where all humans can live forever, assuming they don’t fall off a building. And what is so cool about it is it just talks about the implications of a society that doesn’t die. And, clearly, that’s not sustainable.

But, at the same time, when people don’t die, it creates great challenges to institutions that we kind of take for granted. For example, what’s marriage if you don’t die? So, I just really liked the story and I liked some of the more intellectual kind of dilemmas that it created.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. And, Steven, is there a particular quote that you share, a Steven original, that seems to really connect and resonate with folks?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

It might be something around the notion of stewardship. So, this is something I talk about a lot, that the best meeting leaders recognize that they’re inherently a steward of others’ time.

Pete Mockaitis

And, Steven, do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Make meaningful time available to those on your team, in your network, and do as much good as you can do, elevate as many lives as you can. And, ultimately, through both of those, the wonderful benefit is that you will thrive as well. And I always go back to one of the greatest predictors of life satisfaction is helping of others. And one-on-ones, that opportunity, sincerely and truly help others.

Pete Mockaitis

All right. Steven, thank you for this. I wish you many transformational one-on-ones.

Dr. Steven Rogelberg

Thank you very much. And, definitely, folks can check out my website, StevenRogelberg.com. I have a ton of resources there for people, lots of things, checklists that they can download. I obviously have links to the book. The neat thing is I just want to get this book out there. I’m donating all my royalties to the American Cancer Society, every penny of them. So, check out the book if you want to have transformative one-on-ones, or check out the book if you want to help eradicate cancer.

836: How to Drive Engagement to Get Your Project Done with Anh Dao Pham

By | Podcasts | No Comments

 

 

Anh Dao Pham says: "“What are the next steps?” It’s the most powerful question that you can ask."

Anh Dao Pham shares her battle-tested strategies for leading your team to project success, even without formal authority.

You’ll Learn:

  1. The one essential question to get any project moving.
  2. An overlooked skill that boosts project success rates.
  3. The two things you need for people to align with your goals.

About Anh Dao

Anh Dao Pham, VP of Product & Program Management at Edmunds.com, has successfully led technical projects for two decades at start-ups and major corporations. In her book Glue: How Project Leaders Create Cohesive, Engaged, High-Performing Teams, Anh vividly brings compassionate, positive, nimble leadership to life, demonstrating with actionable guidance, the power of caring and connection to inspire outstanding results.

Anh lives with her husband and two children in Los Angeles, California.

Resources Mentioned

Anh Dao Pham Interview Transcript

Pete Mockaitis
Anh, welcome to How to be Awesome at Your Job.

Anh Dao Pham
Thank you so much for having me here, Pete.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, I’m so excited to dig into your wisdom about project leadership and high-performing teams. But, first, I think we need to hear a little about your history of writing jingles and rhymes associated with team accomplishments. What’s the story here and can you give us some examples, please?

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, this is a really silly thing. A few years ago, when I was working at Opower, I was one of the more senior leaders on the engineering team and I was asked to give the quarterly update. And the first time I gave that quarterly update, it was so dry I think everybody fell asleep, including me if I could have. But the reason it was so dry was because when you work in product development and you’re leading an engineering team, the engineering team’s accomplishments are very similar to the product update. So, the product team gives an update and then you give yours, it’s almost the same.

So, the next time I was called upon to do a quarterly update, I decided not to give the general product update and, instead, decided to write, like, a tribute to the team in a jingle format. So, I got some inspiration from The Brady Brunch tune, and then wrote a jingle about our product managers and our engineers and how they had delivered on this website product, and then got folks on the team to actually sing it during the quarterly all-hands, and it was a really big hit.

And from then on, it became kind of a tradition at Opower, so every quarterly update, they look for the jingle. We’d get a bunch of people to sing and we had some great, great things out there. And so, since then, instead of just giving normal praise or an update when I have, like, a big team accomplishment or a big milestone the team has approached, then, oftentimes, I’ll write a jingle and then I’ll recruit people to sing it.

And so, as an example, this last holiday season, instead of having, like, a big party because everybody was remote, I ended up writing 17 limericks for everybody on the team.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, limericks?

Anh Dao Pham
And I read them out like in a toast format, and it was a pretty big hit. There’s something very novel about writing a rhyme or a jingle, and I find that it’s very memorable, people really appreciate it, it shows them that you care in a very special way, and it gives people just that special feeling when being on a team.

And so, I want to tell you, I have a surprise for you, because I decided before I got on the show that I would write you a jingle…

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, wow, thank you.

Anh Dao Pham
…just so you can see this in action. It’s actually a limerick, so here it is.

There once was a host named Pete
Whose podcast was rather sweet.
He interviewed people with tips to share
For being awesome at work everywhere.
And on top of that, he gave it all away for free.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, lovely. Thank you. That is a first 830-some episodes, first limerick. So, thank you.

Anh Dao Pham
You’re welcome.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s fun. Okay, cool. Well, I’m excited to dig into those kinds of tidbits, your unique flavor and spin on project goodness. You’ve got a book called Glue: How Project Leaders Create Cohesive, Engaged, High-Performing Teams, which is a great title. We like those sorts of things here. Can you tell us any particularly novel, surprising, fascinating, counterintuitive discoveries you’ve made about this stuff over the course of your career and putting together the book?

Anh Dao Pham
I’d say the most surprising thing is that when I set out to write Glue, I didn’t realize how much of an influence books on social psychology and happiness would be and influence on the actual content in the book. And for a few years prior to writing Glue, I was doing a little bit of soul-searching, I read a number of books on the science of happiness and different social psychologists, like Adam Grant, Angela Duckworth, Sean Achor, just a bunch of very well-known authors in that space.

And it turns out that a lot of the work that supports the science of happiness, around how to make yourself happy ends up being really applicable content for how to motivate teams. And so, in my work and in Glue, I talk a lot about the science of happiness, social psychology, and how to motivate and influence people through those same mechanisms, which I think makes that unique. And, for me, it’s most important, when I’m a leader, to help teams not only deliver but do it in a way that makes them feel fulfilled and happy at work.

And so, I think a lot of that comes through and ends up being somewhat surprising or a novel content for a leadership book you don’t typically find as many studies around the science of happiness.

Pete Mockaitis
Well, we love those here, so it’s no surprise that we have found each other. So, that’s cool. Well, then I’d love it if we could dig into some particulars. Could you start off with sort of the core message or big idea or thesis behind the book?

Anh Dao Pham
So, Glue, at the end of the day is both a project management leadership book, and the main principle behind it is that I wanted to be able to express to people how you can both manage teams and lead people in a way that makes them productive so that they deliver but also makes them really happy and inspired with their jobs, and that in turn inspires me and makes me feel better about my job.

Pete Mockaitis
Cool. All right. Well, so let’s dig in. Now, one thing that’s intriguing is you draw a distinction between a project manager and a project leader. What is the difference and why does that matter?

Anh Dao Pham
The main distinction between a project manager and a project leader is that you don’t necessarily have to have a title in order to be a project leader. Project leaders rise up through all parts of the organization because there is a need to have somebody lead a particular initiative or a particular team. And what I find is that people often, if they don’t have, like, an ordained title in some way, feel like they don’t have the authority to act in a certain way.

So, I wanted to make the distinction between somebody who has the official title of project manager, which has, like, a specific job description associated with it, versus a person who just may have risen up in the organization and is a leader of sorts but would likely need very similar tools and tactics to be able to make their team successful.

So, at the end of the day, you can be a project leader from any part of the organization. You just have to be a person who has stepped up to lead in some capacity on a particular initiative, and I’m hoping that this book is applicable much more broadly than just anybody with a specific project manager title.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And then could you kick us off with a pretty inspiring…let’s see, I’ll do that again. Well, in getting a taste of what could be possible and at stake for us if we internalized some of these best practices, could you share a cool story of a project leader who was able to see a beautiful upgrade in the results they’re able to create by following some of these principles?

Anh Dao Pham
I wanted to start with an analogy from a different industry entirely, which is basketball. And I’m actually not a basketball fan, but one of the things that I realized as I was doing research for the book, was I was talking to one of my best friends who is into basketball about the book and about some of the principles that I was talking about, about being glue, and he said, “Oh, it’s like Draymond Green. He’s a glue guy. He plays basketball.” And I’m like, “Tell me more about this.”

And it turns out that there’s a phenomenon in basketball where there are players called glue guys who are extremely valuable to the teams but they are not the people who score the most points, so it seems counterintuitive. Like, typically, when you think about a star basketball player, you think about somebody like a Michael Jordan who scores the most baskets.

In this case, these players are most valuable not because they actually score the most points, but because they are true team players. And so, when they’re on the court, what happens is the teams have a much higher likelihood to achieve success and win the games than when they’re not on the court even though they don’t actually score.

And the principles around Glue are basically the same. So, it’s not about being a leader, being out in front, getting all the credit for something, or being the star player on a particular team. It’s about looking at a team and trying to figure out what you can do to actually bolster the productivity of the team and make them feel healthier, happier, complete the team where they may have gaps. And that’s what the essence of Glue is.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, so that sounds like something we all love to be here in terms of listeners of How to be Awesome at Your Job. And now let’s dig into some of the particulars. I love your table of contents chapter titles. They’re so enticing and captivating, so I’m just going to go right through my favorites and ask bit by bit. First, how do we build rapport quickly?

Anh Dao Pham
There are a lot of ways to build rapport quickly. And, actually, you’ll notice that my book was endorsed by Robert Cialdini. He wrote a book called Influence, which is immensely popular.

Pete Mockaitis
We’ve had him on the show and we love him. Oh, he’s so good.

Anh Dao Pham
He’s amazing. He’s amazing. There’s all these tactics that you can use that help you understand how to build rapport with people and how to influence people without actually having authority. And so, a lot of the things are very simple. Like, in Robert Cialdini’s book, he talks about just making sure that you, when you speak with a person, you actually provide a reason for what you’re asking to do.

And when you do things like that, where you ask a person to actually complete a task for you, or make a request, and you provide them a reason for the work that they’re doing, it helps them understand why their work is important, and, ultimately, build rapport and helps them trust you more. So, that’s one principle.

Another one comes from Dale Carnegie, which is really simple. It’s just using people’s names. But in a multicultural environment, and, in particular, in a remote environment, it’s even more important that you use people’s names and that you also get their pronunciations correctly and that you know how to spell their names correctly. These are small things but they make a really big difference in building rapport with a particular person.

And then another type is, just make sure that you’re accessible and approachable. So, if you have a team that you’re trying to get know, maybe arrange some sort of social situation where you can get to know them better, take some time at the beginning of your meetings to pause a little bit, have some informal conversation to warm up, talk about their weekend. Make them feel like they’re people not just a person who’s actually completing a task but somebody you genuinely care about and are interested in. Those are the best things that you can do to start building rapport.

And then the final thing, which is something that I get quoted on a lot is I call the candy bowl, the magical candy bowl, and you’ll see this in the book title, or in the chapter title, where I always keep a candy bowl on my desk. And the reason that I do that is because it sort of embodies a bunch of these principles. It makes me approachable in the sense that it gives people a reason to actually come to my desk and talk to me.

Oftentimes, people actually come to my desk and then take candy when I’m not there, but it establishes me as a giver. So, even if I wasn’t there, they remember, “Anh has a candy bowl on her desk and I can come get it whenever I want.” And if I then talk to them later, even if we haven’t had a conversation, it actually creates a certain amount of equity with them, like I’ve deposited something in their virtual piggybank. And if I go talk to them later, they already have a warm feeling associated with me because I’ve given them something whether or not I know it.

And so, that to me is like a very classic trick, and I have always had a candy bowl on my desk since I can remember.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s lovely. I’ve got a couple follow-up questions there, Anh. One is what candies are the fan favorites, perennial, time after time?

Anh Dao Pham
Branded chocolate goes the fastest.

Pete Mockaitis
Anytime, like KitKat or Snickers or anything.

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, Hershey’s, Snickers, Reese’s Pieces, anything that’s branded. I would try generic chocolate, like Palmers, during the holidays, when you get the Easter eggs and things like that, they don’t go quite as fast. But anything that’s like, yeah, KitKat, Reese’s, M&Ms, chocolate M&Ms, those go really fast. And it’s kind of my own experiment over the years, that’s something you see, what type of snack actually goes the fastest.

And there’s something interesting about the amount of candy that you put in the bowl as well. This is such a random nuance. But if you put too much candy in the bowl, especially if, let’s say, I get a brand-new bag of chocolate, and I dump the whole thing in the bowl, it goes faster. There’s something about the idea that there’s just a lot of candy that people come and take a handful of it, but if I ration it and put it out in smaller segments, then it tends to last a lot longer. People will come and take one or two rather than a handful. So, very interesting.

Pete Mockaitis
I absolutely noticed this phenomenon with, well, I was thinking, like, just drinking water in terms of if I have a big vessel of water, I will take bigger gulps more frequently versus if I’ve got a bottle of water in my last thirst, “Ooh, we better be sparing,” even though there’s more not too far away. It just gets inside you. That’s good.

Well, Anh, my next follow-up question is, when it comes to using names, how much is too much? Sometimes I feel like I hold myself back more than I need to, Anh. And so, now I’m just going to try a little bit right now, and you tell me when it feels excessive. I’m thinking when you address someone, of course, it just makes sense, or when you’re wrapping something up, like, “Thank you, Anh.” I guess every sentence would be too much. Do you have a sense for how much is too much when it comes to name use?

Anh Dao Pham
There probably is a too much. Like, yeah, I’d say every sentence is probably too much. But if you go back to what Dale Carnegie said, and I reference this in the book, the sound of a person’s name is the sweetest sound to them. So, if you can use it tastefully, in particular, if you can use it to address a person when you’re prompting them for a question, so I think that’s really important.

Addressing a particular person, addressing or acknowledging something that somebody said so that they understand that you actually heard them, those two, I think, are the most critical times to say a person’s name so that they really feel like you’re making a connection with them.

Pete Mockaitis
That is good. And I’m thinking about my buddy and mentor, Mawi, episode number one, he will insert my name right in the middle of sentences, and more than most people I know, and I really like it. He’ll say, “You know what we discovered, Pete…” and I’ll be like, “Well, what? What did you discover?” It’s like you have galvanized my attention, and I want to know even more.

And if I happen to be drifting, I really do feel, like, “Oh, I should be paying attention. He’s talking directly to me even though, of course, he was. We are really the only two people at this lunch.” But it has an effect, it’s a good one. Thank you.

Anh Dao Pham
Exactly. And then I think, in particular, if you’re working in a remote environment, using people’s names is extremely important. A lot of times, people have their cameras off, and if you use their name, they know you’re speaking directly to them even if they can’t see you. So, I think it is an even more important tool to be using now than it has been in the past.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And another table of contents prompt so juicy, what is the essential question to getting any project moving?

Anh Dao Pham
“What are the next steps?” It’s the most powerful question that you can ask. At the end of every meeting, if you leave and you don’t ask that question, you’re going to find that you’re going to be less productive on all of your projects. And so, if there’s no other question that you ask, if you’re silent the whole meeting as a facilitator, in the very end you make sure to ask, “What are the next steps? Who’s going to be doing them?” and then capture that information, you will be able to move your project forward.

Pete Mockaitis
Absolutely. This reminds me of David Allen, for individuals getting things done, “What is the next action?” And it’s just magic how it gets stuff unstuck. And sometimes it’s so simple, it’s like, “Oh, I guess we got to look at our calendars to see when these three people can get together.” Like, “Oh, okay. Well, that’s not so hard. Let’s just go ahead and do that.”

Anh Dao Pham
Exactly. And I think if you’re doing any sort of leadership, in particular, project leadership, your goal really is to always be making progress. So, even if it’s small, as long as you’re moving the project forward with something like, “I know what the very next step is,” it doesn’t have to be the next ten steps, just the very next one, you’re going to continue to move everybody forward and make progress against your goals.

Pete Mockaitis
Alrighty. Now, everybody asks you to teach a particular skill, which I would not have guessed – it’s notetaking. What’s up with that? Why does notetaking matter? And how can you do it in a way that is differentiated-ly excellent that matters?

Anh Dao Pham
I am very passionate about notetaking. This is one of the strange traits about me, and most people, almost everybody who’s encountered me even briefly at work, knows this about me. It’s something that’s actually, to me, a cornerstone of my success in my career. I take avid notes, I type very fast, I take avid notes almost on every call or meeting that I have, even if I’m not going to publish them, because it’s part of my learning process.

And the reason that people ask me about it is because I often publish those notes out. So, as a part of my learning process, when I’m learning more information, I tend to take them. And I don’t just sort of listen to things verbatim. I listen to things and then I rephrase them as I’m typing them, or I try to reorganize them. So, when I was in college, I learned, like, you could take…if you take notes in outline format, your retention of that information is so much higher than if you just sort of listen to something coming in one ear and then typing it out verbatim what people had said.

So, what I started to do was sort of reorganize the information, put it in such a way that it is summarized, and then send all that information out and broadcast it to people so that they know that they’ve been heard, they know whose action is next, what the next steps are, all of the things that were important as a part of those discussion get captured, codified, and then broadcasted.

And it is possible to be significantly better at taking notes than another person in the sense that if you take really good notes, in particular, in today’s environment when you’re managing a lot of projects, some things are moving very fast, a lot of things don’t get documented. So, oftentimes, a good set of notes is the document that explains what happened and ends up being a system of record for any decision-serving needs.

So, if you become that person who takes really good notes and people know that, you start to just have a certain amount of power because you hold this information and people see you as a person who has access to this information very readily. The other thing about it is, like I said before, if I take good notes, then I learn more than almost anybody else in the conversation. It just crystallizes my memory for it so that when people ask me about it later, I have much greater recall ability.

And when it’s summarized in that fashion, I once had a person tell me he went home after my meeting, and told his wife, “These notes were better than the meeting,” because a lot of times, meetings will meander back and forth.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, sure.

Anh Dao Pham
But if you kind of like consolidate the information under certain bullets, you can read this nice summary, it refreshes your memory and you know exactly where to go after that. So, yeah, those to me are the big key traits around taking good notes, is making sure that they’re organized, making sure that they track, capture what’s most important as a part of the conversation, and that you share them out so that people know you have access to them and can refer back to them.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, we might have to do a full follow-up episode if you’re down to talking about notetaking, because if it’s your superpower, and no one else has brought that up as their superpower, and it’s yielding value, that’s certainly cool. So, I’ll just restrain myself to a couple follow-ups for this conversation.

Anh Dao Pham
Absolutely.

Pete Mockaitis
So, you’re not just verbatim writing all the things you hear, but you’re rather trying to get some organization outlined to it. So, when I hear the word outline, I could think of a very strict “Roman numeral one. Indent, capital A. Further indent, Arabic numeral one.” So, that’s like a very formal, like when I’m learning how to write a paper in grade school, outline. Is that what you mean by outline in terms of the transformation that you’re mentally processing stuff as you outline?

Anh Dao Pham
No, actually, it doesn’t have to be. If that’s really comfortable for you, or your word processing application automatically numbers things for you, I think it’s fine, but it’s more important that you sort of categorize information. So, if a topic meanders, as an example, sometimes, let’s say we talk about notetaking now, and then five more minutes, it comes back again.

What I would do is have a topic of notetaking in my notes, and then I would put a couple of bullets from the first part of the conversation, and then in the second part, I would move that up so that it’s in the same section. So, when somebody is skimming it, they can see all of the takeaways all together at the same time.

And it’s not so important that you have, like, a strict way of taking the notes. It’s that you’ve summarized the information. And what’s even more critical is that you summarize the information in your own words. So, don’t try to take notes verbatim as somebody said them. Try to restate them in your own words so that it comes out more naturally and to confirm that you actually understood what it was that was being said.

Because, oftentimes, when people speak, it doesn’t make for eloquent or concise writing, so if you’ve summarized it in a good way, then people can read it, get the takeaways very quickly, rather than trying to skim through all the uhms and ahhs that actually come out in a conversation.

Pete Mockaitis
Sure thing. And to give us a taste, can we find a sample of your notetaking somewhere?

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, in the book, I actually put a few samples, one of the worst notes or no notes at all. So, if you just take basic notes, it’s still better than no notes. The second tier up is, at least, capture the key decisions and action items and who’s responsible for them. So, there’s a sample of what that looks like, then there’s sort of the next layer of fidelity, which is capturing a few key decisions in a little bit more detail. And then there’s sort of a more robust version of those notes.

And the sample I gave is from, like, a home remodeling project, which may have been overkill for a home remodeling project, but at least gives you an idea of the types of things that you would want to capture. Some of the salient points in the conversation that you might want to have for context later, those are the types of things that you might want to capture if you were taking really robust notes.

And, in particular, the why behind decisions. So, if you’re capturing just the decision but not why, if you take those in your notes, it again helps you understand it, and then it also helps you convey that information to other people.

Pete Mockaitis
I like that a lot. And I imagine it might vary a bit, but just to give us a bit of reference, if there’s a 30-minute meeting, which might have a word count of 4,500-ish words – that’s a lot of podcast ads experience talking right there, 150 words per minute – how many words or pages might your notes end up being?

Anh Dao Pham
It really depends on how efficient the conversation was. So, it could be that you had a 30-minute meeting but you swirled around talking about different options and deliberating them and debating them. In the end, your summary may have been as concise as maybe half a page, you said, “We talked about option one, option two, option three. We made this decision and this is why.” It could be that concise. And so, it doesn’t have to be verbose, it just has to capture the most salient points.

Now, sometimes you have a meeting, like I had one with one of my managers this morning, and we covered 15 topics, and it was 30 minutes, and it was, like, “Bullet. Here’s what we discussed. Bullet. Here’s what we discussed.” And that one ended up being more than a page long just for me to sort of capture those points.

So, I think it really depends on how much ground you cover. It’s not so much what your word count is but what were the most important things that you needed to capture and what’s the most concise way to capture them.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. Well, now could you share with us the three levers to keep your project on time and on track?

Anh Dao Pham
Sure. So, this is actually the one thing in the book that does sort of follow classical project management. There are really three things: it’s scope, meaning how much you’re actually trying to achieve in a particular project; time, which is the amount of time it’s going to take; and then resources, which could be either money or the number of people working on a particular project. That’s like the classic triangle of constraints for any project management course you would see.

And when you’re managing a project, it’s really important for you to understand what levers you actually have available to you. And so, if there is something that ends up being a gotcha or surprise, which always happens, no project ever goes as planned, then you can look to see which of these constraints are movable. And the easiest thing typically to do is to increase your timeline but, oftentimes, if you increase your timeline on a project too often or too much, then people fatigue of the project and they feel like it’s not successful, so you want to use that very sparingly.

The next is resources. If you have any resources, you can throw at a project, or if you can clear things off of a plate of a person who’s on the project so that they’re not splintered, then you can get more capacity. That’s always a good way to go about doing things. And then scope is something that people forget is negotiable.

Because even if people say at the very beginning of a project the scope is not negotiable, the closer you get to launching your project, the scope gets much more malleable, and that’s for two reasons. One is that people are more or less willing to actually yield on things that they want very early in the process. And the second is that the closer you get to launching a particular project, the more clear you are about what you’re trying to achieve.

And so, things that seem like they may have been very important at the beginning tend to be more negotiable or more malleable towards the end. So, I like to lean on scope first, then resources, then time if possible.

Pete Mockaitis
I love that. I’m familiar with the triangle and the constraints. I learned that in college, and it was an eye-opener, and I love, Anh, those extra layers and considerations and weightings that you put on them. So, handy stuff. I’m just going to keep rolling through your excellent table of contents. Chapter 13, how do we communicate what’s most important?

Anh Dao Pham
Through every medium possible.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay.

Anh Dao Pham
And this sounds funny, this is sort of like your question, “How much is too much when you’re using my name?” How much is too much when you’re articulating a goal? It’s almost never too much. And the reason is because people are very focused on their individual tasks, and it’s very easy for them to lose sight of what’s going on for a bigger picture.

So, if you’re trying to orient somebody against a goal, then what you want to do is, first, make sure that the goal is clear and unambiguous, everybody understands what it is. Then, second, articulate it in writing, verbally. If you want to plaster it on a wall, like, do whatever you can to broadcast the goal and do it in multiple mediums, and to reinforce it almost every chance you get.

I had a very funny example where I was marching towards a big project, and every day at the very beginning of the scrum, which is the meeting that we had for everybody, getting together to check in on status every day, I had a slide at the very beginning before we actually went to scrum that said how many days were left to the goal, till the launch date.

And so, 15, 14, 13, counting down every day. And two times, very close to launch date, I think I remember it was like five days to launch date, somebody pulled me aside, and was like, “Wait, when are we launching again?” And I realized, and so I just very politely said, “We’re launching in five days. This is the date.”

And it’s funny because people learn through different mediums. Some people are audio learners, so if you say it to them, they actually get it. Some people are visual, so if you broadcast it visually in some way, that’s when they get it. Some people need those things reinforced and some people actually need to say it themselves.

So, if you really want to know if somebody has actually ingested and internalized your goal, you can ask them to say it back to you, and only when they’ve actually articulated that you know for sure that they actually understood it.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. That’s good. And I guess you have to be careful with that so that it does not seem, I don’t know, patronizing or condescending.

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, I think you have to just take the request and respond to them, and know that you’re going to be repeating yourself a lot but that it’s just totally expected. And as long as you’re always tying it back to work that people are doing, they’re not going to feel like it’s too much.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. All right, Anh, let’s hear Chapter 14. “When is your project done?” It’s not when I think. Do tell.

Anh Dao Pham
This chapter is actually about the principle of taking ownership on a project. And one of the things that I think is a big misconception is people put together a project plan when they start a new project, and there’s typically a launch date at the end, and that’s what you’re marching towards. So, let’s say you’ve got a three-month project, you’re launching towards the launch date.

And then at the end of the launch date, people feel like their project is done but that is not the case because, oftentimes, like I said, maybe you’re marching through that launch date and you looked at all these constraints because there were some sort of crazy surprise that happened, and now you’ve started to cut scope. And I like to call cutting scope very close to the launch date as roadkill. This was like roadkill on the path to getting to my goal. I started pushing things to the side, and saying, “Not critical. Not critical.”

So, once you’ve launched, there typically is, like, a number of things that still need to be happening in order for you to make your project a success. It can’t just be launch and sort of out on the ether. You need to go back and take care of all of the things that you don’t need in this roadkill along the way. Maybe you need to do additional communication to people who were stakeholders but maybe impacted after the fact.

So, a key example here is if you work in product development, or if you’re launching any sort of product or new thing, oftentimes, there are people who have to support that new thing once it’s out. So, it’s not just like making the feature available or the new product available, it’s also about making sure that the people who are going to need to support that are trained and have all the answers that they need to be able to do that in a sustained fashion, or there’s a place to ask later when there’s an issue with whatever that is that you’ve just released.

And so, all these things happen after a project launch date, but the project launch date is most commonly focused on as the end of your project. And so, in the chapter, I talk about this, it’s not so much that there are steps that you can do to say when your project is done. It’s more about an attitude. If you take ownership of a project as a project leader, and you think of yourself almost like the CEO of your project, then you don’t limit yourself to the scope of work that’s already been defined or what’s been defined to you by your title.

So, if you’re a product manager in my world, I might say, like, “Well, my goal is to define the product and get it out there.” But if I want it to be a success, I might have to do things that are beyond the launch date, beyond the scope of my role. And so, if you really think of yourself as an owner, and that you are paramount to this project’s success, then you will look to see what else needs to be done after the launch date. And until those things are completed, you’ll know that your job is not done.

The other thing is, always plan a celebration when you hit a big milestone. Don’t forget the tail end of a big project. It’s not done until you celebrate it with your team.

Pete Mockaitis
Beautiful. Well, Anh, tell me, any final thoughts you want to make sure to mention before we shift gears and hear about some of your favorite things?

Anh Dao Pham
Sure. I’d say, at the end of the day, leading projects and leading people is not cookie cutter, and I think this is probably the biggest thing that’s not fully articulated this way in the book but, hopefully, is a big key takeaway for people. Most of the things that I do are very people-driven. I’m most worried about boosting productivity for the people on my team, and I do whatever it takes to make that happen.

So, every project, every team is custom, and you’re different, the way that you add your perspective to a team is different. And so, I would like to warn people against sort of blindly following checklists, and, instead, to think about ways that you can customize your approach based off the team’s needs and what you’re trying to accomplish, and the personalities on the team. And know that if you do that, you’re going to be a lot more successful than somebody who is just trying to apply some set of rules blindly without thinking them through.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Well, now could you share with us a favorite quote, something you find inspiring?

Anh Dao Pham
Yes. From one of my favorite books on happiness, What Happy People Know by Dan Baker and Cameron Stauth, the quote is, “We don’t describe the world we see. We see the world we describe.” And I love this because it’s very telling about human thoughts, in the sense that we often think that things are dictated to us, but, in fact, we actually have a lot of power to transform our worlds based off of what we call ourselves.

So, if you call yourself a project manager versus a project leader, that makes a really big difference in how you actually translate your role and your sense of ownership. And so, I love that quote because every time I feel like I’m being limited by the way that I’m calling myself something or the way that I’m framing a particular scenario, I try to reframe it to see if I can change the way that the world is reacting to me.

Pete Mockaitis
You know, I like that a lot. And I don’t know where I borrowed this phrase. I got it from a job description which I thought was funny. I think it said one of the requirements was to “Provide visionary leadership.”

Anh Dao Pham
Like it’s so easy.

Pete Mockaitis
And just like that, and I thought, “All right, what’s on my to-do list today? Okay, provide visionary leadership. Check.” But I found that when I say that to myself, like, “Okay, I’m going to write a bunch of emails to my team and the collaborators, right,” it’s like, okay, so one view is, “Okay, that’s a thing that’s got to get out the door, a bunch of emails. Check, check, check.”

Versus if I say to myself, and I’m kind of joking and I’m kind of being highfalutin for the fun of it, it’s like, “All right, on my to-do list is to provide visionary leadership on these course adaptations.” And then, sure enough, I really do feel more jazzed about it, and really do spend some more time providing useful feedback and direction that is more enriching for folks.

So, yeah, how I describe that to-do list item really does shape how I perform it even though I was kind of joking.

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, there are studies about this. It’s called jobcasting where you take your job, and you try to put it in a bigger context. So, for example, you’re a podcast host, you could say, “My job is to create podcasts,” or you could say your job is to put more information out in the world so that you can help people all over the world be better at their jobs. The second one is going to be so much more inspiring than the first, right?

So, the way that you frame what you’re doing has a very tangible impact on your perspective and how motivated you are going to be to do that job. So, I think that that’s so insightful, and the fact that you actually have the power to change your own perception by describing it differently, I think, is just phenomenal.

Pete Mockaitis
And how about a favorite study or experiment or bit of research?

Anh Dao Pham
Now, this is a hard one because a lot of your prior guests have cited lots of great studies, and so I was trying to find one that I felt was unique. And I ended up landing on a study that Sean Achor, who’s the author of The Happiness Advantage, did to himself, which I think about all the time. And it’s a very novel study about what it takes to adopt new habits versus what it takes to deter yourself from stopping…or to deter yourself from continuing to do old habits that are not so good for you, and he calls it the 20-second rule.

And the experiment goes like this. He wanted to play his guitar more often. And so, he had a guitar that he bought, it was in his closet. And he decided to see if he removed the friction from playing the guitar by just buying a stand and then putting the guitar out in the middle of the room, whether or not he would actually play his guitar more often.

And it turns out, just the additional friction of getting off of the couch, going over to the closet, getting the guitar out reduces the amount of time that he would actually play on the guitar. So, he had a lot of success in just moving it from one location to another. And then he did another experiment which I thought was so funny.

He had a remote control that he typically used to leave on his couch so that when he watched television, it’s there. That’s what everybody does. Their remote control is right on the television, so you plop down on the couch and got it, and then you turn it on. But he wanted to stop watching as much television and, instead, read more books.

So, what he did was he took the batteries out of his remote control, and he put them in a drawer that was a few feet away, and he said he timed himself. It took him about 20 seconds if he were to get up out of the couch, go to the drawer, put the batteries in and close the remote control to start using it. And his goal was to see if he created that little additional friction if he would stop watching television as much.

And so, what he found was he did. He stopped watching television as much because he was sort of inherently lazy in that additional 20 seconds. The friction actually caused him to pick up the book that was, like, right within arms’ reach on the couch rather than watch television. So, I find that to be like a fantastic study. And in my real life, I use it both at home as well as at work when I think about why people are not responding to me or not able to complete a different task that I asked them to do.

I see, “Is there a way that I can make their job easier?” So, for example, if you ask people very open-ended questions, it’s difficult for them to answer because they have to craft a response from scratch. But if you give them statements that they have to react to, that takes a lot less brain power so you can be much more effective at getting responses that way.

Another example is in my home life. My husband is 6’2” and I’m 5’4” and so I love Post-Its, I put them…write things on them all the time as a reminder I want to give him. There’s one trick that I have done more recently and that is very effective. It’s when I have a reminder for him, and not me, I write it on a Post-It and then I put it at his eye level, not mine. And just by writing with it being right in front of him instead of right in front of where I would be, he has a much harder time missing it, and knows it’s for him.

Pete Mockaitis
That’s good. And a favorite book?

Anh Dao Pham
A favorite book, this is really hard. I’ve just quoted What Happy People Know by Dan Baker and Cameron Stauth. That’s one of my all-time favorites in terms of happiness as well as The Happiness Advantage. And then in terms of non-self-help or happiness books, I recently enjoyed a couple of memoirs. I really liked Untamed by Glennon Doyle, and then also Crying in H Mart by Michelle Zauner.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And do you have a particular nugget you’re known for, something that people quote back to you often?

Anh Dao Pham
Outside of notetaking and the candy bowl effect?

Pete Mockaitis
That’s plenty really.

Anh Dao Pham
I’d say, yeah, those are nuggets. The one thing about the book that’s actually been very controversial and has come up quite a bit is I do have a chapter about planning where I state that I believe plans are optional. And this is almost like sacrilege for the project management community, but it’s created a lot of controversy.

And it’s not so much that I’m against planning. It’s that, like I said before, I’m against people following things blindly and doing things for the sake of doing them, rather than doing things with specific intention. And so, I challenge the notion that every single project needs to have, like, a detailed project plan. Instead, if you’re looking for ways to boost team productivity, tailor a process to your team, plan when your team needs a plan, and be thoughtful about it. That, to me, has been like a really insightful takeaway that most people have come back to me and ask me about, and particularly controversial.

Pete Mockaitis
Okay. And if folks want to learn more or get in touch, where would you point them?

Anh Dao Pham
I’d love it if folks could find me at my website, it’s www.GlueLeaders.com. Pretty easy to find. You can contact me there, find everything about the book, and also a link to this podcast once it’s available.

Pete Mockaitis
Oh, thank you. And do you have a final challenge or call to action for folks looking to be awesome at their jobs?

Anh Dao Pham
Yeah, actually. I was listening to your podcast, and I think it was episode 830 with Dr. Waldinger where he cited a Gallup quote that I also cited in my book about making friends and making best friends at work, and how that increases both productivity as well as enjoyment. And if you take nothing else away from all this, there’s a lot of little tactics and tricks that you can do to build rapport, be more organized, take notes. But, at the end of the day, to me, the most rewarding thing at work is when you make personal connections.

And so, what I would love to advocate people do is don’t just think of your job as a job. Think of it as a way to make meaningful connections with people, and to accomplish great things together, and bring part of yourself to work. And the reason that I started writing jingles is because I like to rhyme, and it’s silly, but it’s very uniquely me. And if you love to cook, maybe organize potlucks. If you love ping-pong, maybe organize a ping-pong tournament.

My husband and I like to play poker, and so now we’re thinking about combining my love of cooking Vietnamese soups and poker with a “pho”ker night. So, those are things that you can do to bring to your workers, and it makes it more rewarding when you actually create genuine friendships, and then accomplish things together. So, what I would say is find ways to connect with people at work, make friends, and in doing so, hopefully, both your job as well as your coworkers’ jobs will be more rewarding.

Pete Mockaitis
All right. Anh, thank you. This has been a treat. I wish you much fun and good glue.

Anh Dao Pham
Thank you. So nice to meet you.