Submitted by maestro on
in
Forums
First, let me say that I am a huge fan of O3's. Started doing them in my last managerial position, worked very well, and now am implementing them within my new role after a few months of getting settled in.
While I have not been doing the O3's until here recently, over the past couple of months I have been having weekly staff/sales meetings. However, now that I am having the O3's again, I find that there is not a lot of need for the weekly staff meeting-- especially a 90 minute staff meeting as the older podcast on Staff meetings suggests. The 2nd 10 minutes of the O3 is designated for my "waterfall" of items I need to pass on or make the direct aware of. This is also what the 1st 15 minutes of the weekly staff meeting is supposed to be about. This feels redundant to me, which makes me feel as though I am wasting my directs' time, since I've already covered these items with them during our O3.
I'd like some feedback on what I may be missing here. Big believer in the O3, just struggling with whether or not to do away with my weekly staff/sales meeting.
One-on-One's vs. Weekly Staff Meeting
The second ten minutes of the O3 should be more personalized than the staff meeting waterfall. It may be how a particular issue affects that person specifically, it might be a discussion about the sensitive political environment of a large project they're on, or a detailed discussion of a new policy that affects them (like if they're the only one on an H1-B visa).
The waterfall is more generic, about the team and the company overall.
John
One-on-One's vs. Weekly Staff Meeting
I suggest retaining the weekly staff meetings. I use 5-10 minutes of each staff meeting for the waterfall report...and it saves me from having to repeat the information at O3s.
Our weekly staff meetings involve discussion and idea exchanges on strategic projects. Often a great idea comes from someone on the team not directly involved.
In short: do both.
One-on-One's vs. Weekly Staff Meeting
Specifically save some items for the staff meeting. Go ahead and give them to your high-C and high-S employees so they can start to get used to them. But just make sure you leave some time for the waterfall portion.
If you truly don't have anything, use that time to talk about corporate performance, your division's role, whatever little 15 minute thing you'd like to put out. The waterfall doesn't have to start about you - you can be the initiator.
Brian
One-on-One's vs. Weekly Staff Meeting
The waterfall in the staff meeting should be different than the time you spend in the O3.
Remeber that the purpose of a staff meeting is to enable efficient organizational and team communication. During my waterfall time in the staff meeting I go over things that impact either the entire or a significant portion of my team. During the O3 I go over items that impact that direct report only. I don't want to waste time saying the same message over and over during O3's so I use the staff meeting to do a broad communication to the team. The O3 is where I narrow the message to the individual.
Because of this structure, I run my staff meet earlier in the week with the O3's following after the staff.
MadAmos
Keep the staff meeting
I agree with all of the other posts - keep the staff meeting. The O3s are about the DR and you. The staff meeting is about putting the topics discussed in O3s and other necessary items in a cohesive format so that the whole team is aware of what is going on with everyone else and how it all fits together. This is particularly effective when you have a large team or they are geographically dispersed and therefore feel somewhat disconnected. Our staff meetings always include Q&A between staff members as they begin to see the relationships between what they are doing and what others are working on.
One-on-One's vs. Weekly Staff Meeting
Maestro-
Thanks for the post - helpful for many, I'd bet.
I urge you to keep both. Using your 10 minutes for waterfall stuff is ineffective. Focus on THEIR work, rather than on YOUR messages.
And don't forget that the TEAM needs to work together in front of you. That's worth getting together.
Mark