Who the hell got me here ?

Last two months have really been quite taxing on me. Not because I did a lot of research work and published a lot of papers in them, but rather because I had to attend a lot of insipid, annoying, exhausting or rather distressing meetings with no clear-cut purpose or objective in mind. Yesterday was one of those days again. Yet again, I was put through the same ordeal, the same rigours of sitting through a directionless, rudderless discussion where everyone (expect a few intellect souls) was wondering how on earth could they be at the wrong place at the wrong time day after day ! As usual the non-existant agenda was ambiguous, the preparatory groundwork missing and the quorum members totally awe-struck wondering what had struck them !

After attending and observing a series of such discussions and meetings, an interesting definition of 'A Meeting' has evolved.

A Meeting is a deconstructive approach to decision making.It's a forum where people tend to savage each other's opinions/ideas without even knowing what they are bull-shitting about.

But to be honest it has really been a learning experience and a crash course on "What not to do in a meeting ?".
A meeting needs to be differentiated from a brain-storming session. A meeting ought to be confined within the bounds of an agenda and is expected to lead to a decision, in most of the cases, whereas the boundaries in a brain-storming session could be unrestricted and unrestrained and the different and diverse discussions may lead to no final conclusion or outcome. Though there has to be some similarity between the two ; both must have a limited number of competent and prepared members.

From my experience I would like to summarize a few points which I feel should be an integral part of any worthwhile discussion/meeting.

* "Too many cocks spoil the broth" is one of the critical reasons which ensure that the meeting is doomed. As I said earlier, the quorum must include relevant, competent and prepared members only.

* There ought to be a decided agenda and a finite time frame (in most of the cases) to discuss the same before initiating a meeting. The moderator should ensure the compliance to both the above factors during the course of the meeting.

* The Moderator/coordinator should be open to opinions but should be assertive and decisive at the same time. He/she must know where to draw the line if the arguments tend to go out of hand.

* The minutes/outcome of the meeting should be clearly recorded and made available to the participants after the meeting. This is in view of the observation that people tend to have short volatile memories and a tendency to lick what they had spitted earlier.

Well, as they say we live in an imperfect world and things ought to be disorderly here, so no hard feelings/prejudices against anyone/anything.

Just keep discussing and keep meeting !