On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Clint Savage <herlo1(a)gmail.com> wrote:
After you pointed this out, I had to go back and re-read the
guidelines. It's true that our meetings are informal, but I'd like to
follow these rules to help us be more efficient as we tend to get off
track easily and it takes much more time to get through a meeting than
necessary than in my opinion. I'd like meetings to be closer to an
hour than 1.5 hours.
Am I wrong here? Thoughts?
No, I completely agree with you about that and admit the last meeting
I did I tried to push things along aggressively and it still ran 75
minutes. But I did not feel like we wasted much time really. I don't
mind trying it but I think having the leader of the meeting prepare a
good plan and stick to it would help too. On the other hand,
interesting stuff comes up out of the blue and I like discussing new
spontaneous ideas as well.
Preventing or limiting interruptions is good when someone is reporting
about something, I find having to raise my hand in the middle of a
discussion to hinder the discussion though. So I do see value in some
circumstances and harm in others I guess.
John