Have you ever been in one of these conversations?

Joanne: I’m really concerned about my team’s readiness for the upcoming change.  

John: My team has been ready for weeks. 

Julie: Do you think that we’ve done a good enough job communicating across the organization? 

Frank: I think people are just burned out

It seems like many business meetings resemble a game of whack-a-mole.  One person makes a statement. The next person chimes in on a slightly different topic.  A third person changes the subject once again.  This continues until the meeting or topic ends.

It’s no wonder that so little gets accomplished in meetings.  It’s also not surprising that so many people dislike going to meetings and see them as a waste of their time.

Meetings can be productive.  A good meeting can produce dialog about issues so that an informed decision can be made.  It can create buy-in and understanding.  It can foster engagement and collaboration.  But this can only happen if we change the nature of our conversations.

By being mindful of the way that your statements influence a discussion, you can help improve the overall quality of the meetings in which you participate.

Communication researchers use a simple tool for understanding the nature of a conversation.  They measure “up”, “down”, and “flat” statements.  The mix and use of these statements say a lot about the nature of the discussion, the power relationships among the participants, and how well people are listening to one another.  Suppose that you are in a meeting regarding a new product launch and someone makes the statement, “I think we need to focus on the 18 to 25 year old, female segment.”  Here are examples of the different types of responses:

Up – Why do you think that segment is so important?

Flat – OK

Down – Can you believe how poorly our last product launch went?

Upward statements extend the conversation.  They facilitate understanding.  They help to uncover issues and drive toward solutions.  They are the statements that drive a productive discussion.

Downward statements subvert the conversation by changing the topic. Sometimes this occurs so subtly that the participants don’t even notice.  As a result, downward statements can be deceptive because they appear to keep the conversation flowing. But, consider the opening conversation in this post.  Joanne received no advice on how to help her team.  John might have had some best practices that everyone could have used.  Julie never found out what people thought about communication across the organization. And, given the pattern, there probably won’t be any discussion on burnout.  Despite this, I bet that all four would consider that to be a good discussion.

Flat statements, on the other hand,  end the discussion.  Ironically, many people perceive flat statements as positive because they are often statements of agreement.  However, flat statements shut down discussion and reduce understanding.  There’s nothing more to say when someone agrees or disagrees.

For example, in a prior job I was required to meet with an outside consultant once a week. The meetings were tedious and non-productive.  The consultant would start each meeting by asking what I wanted to talk about. Then he’d proceed with no regard to what I said.  One day I had a realization. Not only did he not care about what I wanted to talk about, he didn’t care about what he talked about!  If if I asked him a question (upward response), he would “answer” with a downward response by moving on to whatever he wanted to say next. I think that he just liked to hear himself talk.  I changed my approach from using upward responses to flat responses.   By agreeing with his opening statement on a given topic, I shut him down. The meetings went from an hour to fifteen minutes.  I’m not suggesting this as a best practice by any means.  It was the best I could do in an unfortunate circumstance.  It’s just meant to be an example of how effectively flat responses kill a conversation.  If your goal is to keep the conversation going, avoid flat statements.

A good conversation should mostly contain upward statements.  Each participant should attempt to extend, elaborate, and clarify the discussion. The remaining 10-20% should be flat statements coming at the end of the discussion when it’s time to gain consensus.  In a constructive dialog, there is no place for downward statements.

In my experience (based on an extremely loose analysis), about two-thirds of the responses in business meetings are downward.  The remaining third are split between mostly flat and a handful of upward statements.

Pay attention in your next meeting.  How are you contributing?  Are you helping to improve clarity and understanding?  Are you causing people to lose focus and jump around?  Or, are you simply cutting off discussion and dialog?

Meetings can be productive and useful if they are managed well.  The best management starts at the individual level.  As Stephen Covey said, “seek to understand.”  It may seem like the discussion takes a bit longer, but understanding will create a much faster path to the final result.