“I was scheduled for 50 meetings this week.” That’s what a project managertold me recently, and they were “only” assigned to three projects. I’m sure anumber of you have similar tales—having to decide which of three or fourconcurrent meetings you will attend, always arriving late because of comingdirectly from the last meeting and having to try and catch up on emails eitherin the evening or during the meetings themselves (or both).
“我這周安排了50個會議”， 一個專案經理最近和我這樣說， 而他僅僅負責3個專案。 我相信你們中的很多人都有類似的經歷：不得不在3-4個時間衝突的會議中作出選擇， 並且通常會由於剛剛從上一個會議趕來而遲到。 通常你只有晚上處理郵件或者在會議期間處理郵件（或兩者都包括）。
We might look at colleagues and comment on how ridiculous it is, butnothing ever changes and our teams end up suffering because their needs arealways the first we have to compromise. So what, if anything, can we do aboutit? Is there any way to get more control over our role?
我們也許會覺得我們同事的做法有多麼可笑， 但沒有任何改變。 我們的團隊最終還是遭受著痛苦。 那麼， 如果真的有（我們能做的）， 我們能夠做些什麼？有沒有一些辦法讓我們更好地控制我們的角色？
It’s not normal
這不是正常的。
Let’s start bystating right up front that spending 30-plus hours a week in meetings is notpart of the job description of a project manager. I’ll be the first to saycommunication is the most critical skill a PM can have, but meetings aregenerally not effective ways to communicate. They also suck time away fromcommunication that can deliver value—working with teams on issues in a smallgroup or a one-on-one context. So before we consider what a PM can do to tryand control things a little better, let’s try and understand why this situationoccurs in the first place.
首先，
The common—and easy—answer is that the department or organization is sobusy that’s just the way things are. There is a huge amount going on andeveryone is rushed off their feet. Well, there is a difference between a lothappening and being busy. In this case, the PM had three projects—and no matterhow big they are, that just doesn’t justify 50 meetings in any given week.
最常見且最簡單的答案， 就是這個部門或者組織是一個非常忙碌的組織， 而這就是一種常態。 工作量龐大並且每個人都疲於奔命。 然而， 龐大的工作量和忙碌的狀態是有區別的。 在這個場景裡， 那個項目經理負責3個項目， 不管專案有多大， 那也並不意味著要在任何一周安排50個會議要參加。
To get to that point, there has to be a culture of meetings, of needingeveryone to be involved in everything regardless of an individual’s ability tocontribute. I guarantee virtually every one of those 50 meetings will includeat least one person who never said anything, at least one person who didn’tshow up and wasn’t missed and at least one person who couldn’t tell youanything discussed in the meeting because they were focused on something elsewhile on their phone or laptop.
要達到這樣的狀態， 肯定是有一個所謂會議的文化， 需要每個人都要參與到每個事情中， 無論他們自身的貢獻能力有多大。 我敢保證事實上在這50個會議中至少有1個人從來都不發言， 至少有1個人沒有出現並且沒有被錯過， 至少有1個人無法告訴你關於會議的任何事情， 因為他在開會的時候在他的手機或者筆記型電腦上面忙一些別的事情。
There may be many causes for such an environment. I have seen instanceswhere it simply involved an individual in a leadership role who was very detailoriented (a kind description) and wanted to be involved in everything. Theythen dragged in other people because they expected their staff to have the samelevel of awareness and attention, plus all of the people even peripherallyinvolved in the area under discussion.
形成這樣的文化氛圍有很多原因。 我瞭解到的一個情況是， 一個領導者非常關注細節， 並想參與所有的事情。 領導者讓其他人參與進來， 是因為他期望他的員工具備同樣的意識和重視的程度， 甚至要求所有這個會議主題關係不太大的同事也要參與討論。
The quick result is a meeting that is too large to achieve much, followedby additional meetings being scheduled for people to brief the leader onmeetings he or she was unable to attend because of schedule conflicts. This isa fundamental failure on the part of such a leader; they aren’t understandingthat their style and approach isn’t the same as everyone else’s, and their teammembers might be more effective working in a different way.
這樣最直接的一個結果就是會議太大（範圍）而無法有所成就。 此外， 對於領導者由於時間衝突而無法參加的會議， 被委託參加會議的同事還要在會後向領導彙報那個會議的主要內容。 這其實是一個領導者的根本失敗。 他根本沒有理解， 他的風格和方法， 與團隊中的其他人是不同的， 其團隊中的成員本可以用一種更有效率的方式來工作。
In other cases, the entire organization may have that culture—and it isautomatically assumed everyone will be invited to every meeting. Often in thatenvironment, it is expected that people will self-select which meetings theyneed to attend and ignore the rest. At best, that creates confusion and inconsistency.Unless meeting invites clearly communicate the meeting purpose and agenda (andwe all know how regularly that happens), the decision to attend or not becomespure guesswork.
還有一種情況就是， 整個組織的文化， 就是所有人都要被邀請到所有的會議。 通常在這樣的文化環境下， 每個人都會自主選擇他需要參加的會議並自覺忽略其他的會議邀請。 只有在會議邀請中明確說明會議的目的、議程和需要決策的內容， 而不是讓受邀參加會議的人去猜測會議的內容，
The solution
There is a lot written on how to solve the problem of having too many meetings,but I see a major flaw with much of that writing in that it is focused on theindividual. Helping a project manager decide which meetings to attend, which tosend a proxy to, which to simply review the minutes for and which to ignore maymitigate the symptoms for the PM, but it doesn’t solve the problem.
解決方案
關於很多會議的這種討論文章有很多， 但這些文章最大的問題在於， 它們只聚焦個人的因素。 如幫助專案經理決定參加哪些會議， 哪些會議委託別人參加， 哪些會議只是查看會議紀要， 哪些會議可以直接忽略。 這些方法可以減輕PM的痛苦， 卻不能根本解決問題。
To implement a permanent solution, we have to target theorganization—either as a whole, or the individual manager who is creating theflawed culture. I like to do that with a metric that they always care about:money. When you start thinking about the cost of meetings, the numbers becomesignificant. Suppose you have eight people in a meeting that lasts onehour—that’s the equivalent of an eight-hour day for one person. Now multiplythat by the number of hour-long meetings that occur in any given day, and youstart realizing just how much money is being spent on the meetings.
為了能夠從根本上解決問題， 我們需要將目光聚焦在組織（而不是個人）， 無論是將組織作為一個整體考慮， 還是考慮那個創造了錯誤的文化氛圍的經理。 我想使用他們一直關心的度量方法：成本來分析。 當你開始考慮會議的成本時， 數字開始變得可觀起來。 假設你有8個人參加了1個小時的會議，
That spend is okay if the meetings are generating value greater than thecost, but that is frequently not the case. Don’t get me wrong: There areundoubtedly some meetings that are worth the investment of time and people, butthere are many more that would only add value if the people who needed to bethere were included as opposed to all the “extras.” There are likely also asignificant percentage of meetings that could never deliver value because theyshouldn’t have happened in the first place. We wouldn’t agree to double aproject budget for minimal additional benefit, yet that is what we do every daywhen we add people to meeting invites.
不可否認， 如果會議產生的價值大於所花費的成本， 那麼這筆成本是值得的， 但大多數情況並非如此。 不要誤會我， 我相信一定存在值得花時間和人力的會議。 但更多的情況是， 很多會議只有邀請需要參加的人參加才能創造價值， 其餘參加人員只能算“列席”會議。 還會有更多的會議本身就不會產生價值， 因為從一開始這個會議就是沒有意義的。 我們既然不能同意為少量的收益而增加一倍成本預算這樣的事情， 可是在我們邀請無關人參加會議的時候， 這樣的事情卻時時刻刻在發生。
Add to this the indirect costs that result from meetings. Overtime andadditional consultant hours for people who have to work longer than theirstandard time because they spend their regular day in meetings are an obviousexample. Less obvious (but potentially more significant) is the cost created bylost productivity. Whether it is caused by team members feeling demotivatedfrom the environment of constant meetings, their efficiency being impacted bystopping to attend meetings or simply exhaustion caused by the long hours,employees simply won’t be at their best in this environment. That will not onlymean work takes longer (effort and duration), it also increases the likelihoodmistakes will be made creating rework and increasing risks.
這就是會議產生的間接成本。 一個明顯的例子就是，由於在正常工作時間進行了很多會議，導致人員必須依靠加班來完成工作。雖不太明顯（但卻很重要）的結果就是，由於生產力下降造成的額外成本。他們的工作經常由於突然的會議打斷，或者由於長時間參加會議的疲勞而受到影響。員工無法在這樣的環境中處於最佳的工作狀態。於是這將意味著，工作需要更長的時間和更大的努力來完成，同時還會增加可能犯錯導致的返工風險。
When organizations or individuals are presented with these costs, they geta very different perspective on meetings. I once had a conversation with aclient about the fact meetings always started late in her organization. Herresponse was, “Yes, but only about five minutes.” When I pointed out I had beenin 30 meetings in the previous week—so she had paid me the equivalent of abouttwo-and-a-half hours consulting fees to sit around waiting for meetings tostart—the concept of “only five minutes” was looked at very differently.
當在組織或者個人面前呈現這些成本資料的時候，他們卻對會議有不同的看法。有一次，我和一個客戶聊起她組織中的會議經常延遲開始的事實。她的反應就是，“的確是這樣，但也不過就是5分鐘而已”。當我指出，我在過去的一周中參加了30個會議，因此你要多付給我相當於2.5小時的諮詢費，因為我在這裡一直在等待會議的開始，此時的“5分鐘”則開始變得不同。
In this environment, people need to be educated on how to hold meetings.That may sound a slightly ridiculous thing to say, but providing people with astructure and training them on the decision-making process for appropriatemeetings will help to unlearn the bad behaviors. When the problem is one ofculture (as is frequently the case), we can’t simply tell PMs or team membersto skip meetings if they don’t feel they are giving or receiving value. Thatbehavior will be perceived as failing to do their job.
在這樣的環境下，人們需要學會如何組織會議。這也許聽起來有點可笑，但是為人們提供一個（系統的）體系以及培訓他們如何在會議中進行決策的過程，會讓他們拋棄會議的一些不良行為。但是當問題發生在文化身上（通常是這種情況）時，我們無法簡單地告訴項目經理或者團隊成員，如果無法創造價值或者得到價值，就忽略會議邀請。這樣的行為會被認為他們不能勝任工作。
Instead, we have to ensure only the right meetings occur and only theright people are invited to them. Simply requiring all meetings to have adefined purpose with expected outcomes will start to provide that framework.Adding a requirement for a brief explanation to be provided for why each personis requested to attend (what they will contribute and/or what they will gain)will add a further layer of structure. A set agenda with timings will help keepthe meeting on track.
相反，我們必須保證只召開正確的會議，並且只有適當的人被邀請參加會議。要求所有的會議有一個明確的會議目標，和預期達到的效果，這樣就可以形成一個系統的體系。對於每個參與人進行一個簡明的解釋，說明為什麼他要參加這個會議（他們可以提供什麼價值或者能夠從會議中獲得什麼收穫），可以將這個體系結構變得進一步充實。加上時間點明確的會議議程將保證會議能夠如期進行。
That in itself isn’t enough. There needs to be guidelines put in place forthe number of attendees from a group. There likely isn’t a need for threeorganizational levels to attend the same meeting; that’s generally anindication of the most senior person being too involved in the day to day.There should also be models in place that allow for representatives of teams tobrief other members after the fact—the PM can attend information-based meetingsand update the rest of the team on the main points in the next team meeting,for example.
當然只有這些還不夠。還需要有關於一個團隊需要參會人數的指引。來自三個同級別團隊的成員，沒有必要同時參加同一個會議；這就是一個最重要的人過分參與所有的事情的跡象。應該有這樣一個機制，只有團隊的代表參加會議，會後向其他成員轉述會議的主要內容。專案經理可以參加資訊類的會議，並在與團隊的下一次會議中將關鍵要點分享給團隊成員。
I believe there should be agreed windows when meetings shouldn’t happen,whether that’s a meeting-free Friday concept or not having meetings startbefore a certain time each day. Finally, in extreme examples, meetings shouldbe subjected to a cost benefit analysis—is the cost of the meeting justified bythe benefits gained in terms of understanding, problem resolution, etc.? Thiscost benefit should be revisited regularly for recurring meetings, which tendto have declining value returns over time.
我相信會議在沒有必要的時候就不要舉行，無論是引入“無會議週五”的概念，還是在每天某個時間段不舉行會議的約定。最後，在極端的例子裡，每個會議是否決定召開，都需要進行會議的成本收益分析。從理解和問題的解決等方面，花費的會議成本是否是值得的？對於經常性的會議，這種成本收益分析是要定期重新審視的，因為隨著時間的推移，獲得的收益會隨之下降。
Conclusions
Meetings and collaborative working are a vital part of successful work—whetherit is project based or operational. Synergy—the idea that a group workingtogether can achieve more than the same individuals working in isolation—isreal and can be the difference between success and failure.
結論
會議和合作是成功工作的重要組成部分，無論是基於專案還是運營。協同工作的理念，團隊工作的效果優於孤立的個人，確實可以決定工作的成敗。
However, meetings are also one of the most abused work tools in use today.In some cases, individuals can solve those problems by choosing which meetingsto attend and which to skip, but in the vast majority of situations the issueis systemic. It is created by an organizational culture of a large number ofmeetings attended by lots of people and with little structure, control orpurpose. That’s a culture that can be very difficult to break as it consumesanyone coming into that work area (including vendors or consultants who arebrought on board), and becomes the de facto approach to every new project.
然而，會議也是當今濫用最多的工具之一。在某些情況下，個人可以通過選擇參加哪些會議和忽略哪些會議來解決這些問題，但在絕大多數情況下，這個問題是系統化的。它是由許多人組織的大量會議的組織文化創造的，這些會議沒有系統的體系、良好的控制和明確的會議目標。這是一種非常難以改變的文化，因為它會消耗任何進入該工作環境的人員（包括當前的供應商或顧問），並成為每個新項目的事實意義上的嘗試。
To solve the problem, we have to create an awareness of the real,meaningful impact of this approach to work—the drag on bottom-line financialperformance that occurs in this environment. Only then can awareness be broughtto the situation, which is likely to drive meaningful improvement. We must alsoacknowledge that in some situations, the project manager is the one creatingthis culture. If that’s you, just think about how much of your budget andschedule is being consumed in meetings—and then consider whether the endresults justify the size of that investment. I think you already know theanswer.
為了解決這個問題，我們必須意識到這種嘗試的真實意義和影響是什麼，即會議在這個環境下的財務分析的表現如何。只有處於這種情景下，才能促進有意義的改進活動。而我們必須承認，在某些情況下，專案經理就是創造這種會議文化的人。如果那個人是你，你只要想想你的預算和日程有多少消耗在會議上，再分析一下會議的預期結果是否能夠和你的投資相符，那麼我想你應該已經知道了答案。
一個明顯的例子就是，由於在正常工作時間進行了很多會議，導致人員必須依靠加班來完成工作。雖不太明顯（但卻很重要）的結果就是，由於生產力下降造成的額外成本。他們的工作經常由於突然的會議打斷，或者由於長時間參加會議的疲勞而受到影響。員工無法在這樣的環境中處於最佳的工作狀態。於是這將意味著，工作需要更長的時間和更大的努力來完成，同時還會增加可能犯錯導致的返工風險。When organizations or individuals are presented with these costs, they geta very different perspective on meetings. I once had a conversation with aclient about the fact meetings always started late in her organization. Herresponse was, “Yes, but only about five minutes.” When I pointed out I had beenin 30 meetings in the previous week—so she had paid me the equivalent of abouttwo-and-a-half hours consulting fees to sit around waiting for meetings tostart—the concept of “only five minutes” was looked at very differently.
當在組織或者個人面前呈現這些成本資料的時候，他們卻對會議有不同的看法。有一次，我和一個客戶聊起她組織中的會議經常延遲開始的事實。她的反應就是，“的確是這樣，但也不過就是5分鐘而已”。當我指出，我在過去的一周中參加了30個會議，因此你要多付給我相當於2.5小時的諮詢費，因為我在這裡一直在等待會議的開始，此時的“5分鐘”則開始變得不同。
In this environment, people need to be educated on how to hold meetings.That may sound a slightly ridiculous thing to say, but providing people with astructure and training them on the decision-making process for appropriatemeetings will help to unlearn the bad behaviors. When the problem is one ofculture (as is frequently the case), we can’t simply tell PMs or team membersto skip meetings if they don’t feel they are giving or receiving value. Thatbehavior will be perceived as failing to do their job.
在這樣的環境下，人們需要學會如何組織會議。這也許聽起來有點可笑，但是為人們提供一個（系統的）體系以及培訓他們如何在會議中進行決策的過程，會讓他們拋棄會議的一些不良行為。但是當問題發生在文化身上（通常是這種情況）時，我們無法簡單地告訴項目經理或者團隊成員，如果無法創造價值或者得到價值，就忽略會議邀請。這樣的行為會被認為他們不能勝任工作。
Instead, we have to ensure only the right meetings occur and only theright people are invited to them. Simply requiring all meetings to have adefined purpose with expected outcomes will start to provide that framework.Adding a requirement for a brief explanation to be provided for why each personis requested to attend (what they will contribute and/or what they will gain)will add a further layer of structure. A set agenda with timings will help keepthe meeting on track.
相反，我們必須保證只召開正確的會議，並且只有適當的人被邀請參加會議。要求所有的會議有一個明確的會議目標，和預期達到的效果，這樣就可以形成一個系統的體系。對於每個參與人進行一個簡明的解釋，說明為什麼他要參加這個會議（他們可以提供什麼價值或者能夠從會議中獲得什麼收穫），可以將這個體系結構變得進一步充實。加上時間點明確的會議議程將保證會議能夠如期進行。
That in itself isn’t enough. There needs to be guidelines put in place forthe number of attendees from a group. There likely isn’t a need for threeorganizational levels to attend the same meeting; that’s generally anindication of the most senior person being too involved in the day to day.There should also be models in place that allow for representatives of teams tobrief other members after the fact—the PM can attend information-based meetingsand update the rest of the team on the main points in the next team meeting,for example.
當然只有這些還不夠。還需要有關於一個團隊需要參會人數的指引。來自三個同級別團隊的成員，沒有必要同時參加同一個會議；這就是一個最重要的人過分參與所有的事情的跡象。應該有這樣一個機制，只有團隊的代表參加會議，會後向其他成員轉述會議的主要內容。專案經理可以參加資訊類的會議，並在與團隊的下一次會議中將關鍵要點分享給團隊成員。
I believe there should be agreed windows when meetings shouldn’t happen,whether that’s a meeting-free Friday concept or not having meetings startbefore a certain time each day. Finally, in extreme examples, meetings shouldbe subjected to a cost benefit analysis—is the cost of the meeting justified bythe benefits gained in terms of understanding, problem resolution, etc.? Thiscost benefit should be revisited regularly for recurring meetings, which tendto have declining value returns over time.
我相信會議在沒有必要的時候就不要舉行，無論是引入“無會議週五”的概念，還是在每天某個時間段不舉行會議的約定。最後，在極端的例子裡，每個會議是否決定召開，都需要進行會議的成本收益分析。從理解和問題的解決等方面，花費的會議成本是否是值得的？對於經常性的會議，這種成本收益分析是要定期重新審視的，因為隨著時間的推移，獲得的收益會隨之下降。
Conclusions
Meetings and collaborative working are a vital part of successful work—whetherit is project based or operational. Synergy—the idea that a group workingtogether can achieve more than the same individuals working in isolation—isreal and can be the difference between success and failure.
結論
會議和合作是成功工作的重要組成部分，無論是基於專案還是運營。協同工作的理念，團隊工作的效果優於孤立的個人，確實可以決定工作的成敗。
However, meetings are also one of the most abused work tools in use today.In some cases, individuals can solve those problems by choosing which meetingsto attend and which to skip, but in the vast majority of situations the issueis systemic. It is created by an organizational culture of a large number ofmeetings attended by lots of people and with little structure, control orpurpose. That’s a culture that can be very difficult to break as it consumesanyone coming into that work area (including vendors or consultants who arebrought on board), and becomes the de facto approach to every new project.
然而，會議也是當今濫用最多的工具之一。在某些情況下，個人可以通過選擇參加哪些會議和忽略哪些會議來解決這些問題，但在絕大多數情況下，這個問題是系統化的。它是由許多人組織的大量會議的組織文化創造的，這些會議沒有系統的體系、良好的控制和明確的會議目標。這是一種非常難以改變的文化，因為它會消耗任何進入該工作環境的人員（包括當前的供應商或顧問），並成為每個新項目的事實意義上的嘗試。
To solve the problem, we have to create an awareness of the real,meaningful impact of this approach to work—the drag on bottom-line financialperformance that occurs in this environment. Only then can awareness be broughtto the situation, which is likely to drive meaningful improvement. We must alsoacknowledge that in some situations, the project manager is the one creatingthis culture. If that’s you, just think about how much of your budget andschedule is being consumed in meetings—and then consider whether the endresults justify the size of that investment. I think you already know theanswer.
為了解決這個問題，我們必須意識到這種嘗試的真實意義和影響是什麼，即會議在這個環境下的財務分析的表現如何。只有處於這種情景下，才能促進有意義的改進活動。而我們必須承認，在某些情況下，專案經理就是創造這種會議文化的人。如果那個人是你，你只要想想你的預算和日程有多少消耗在會議上，再分析一下會議的預期結果是否能夠和你的投資相符，那麼我想你應該已經知道了答案。