I recently read an article about meetings and the importance of “dissent” and disagreement within them (http://www.thestrategyweb.com/meetings-and-the-importance-of-dissent) for the overall success and productivity of the meeting. One of the points the article’s author made was that meetings are often unsuccessful and unproductive because they seem to create a dynamic that is perfectly opposed to the very purpose of meeting at all – that is to say, meetings encourage agreement, conformity, and reaffirmation of the status quo as opposed to challenging current practices, inviting debate, criticism, or fresh thinking. Meetings tend to reaffirm things we already know and to avoid the trickiest (and often the most important) issues because they spark disagreement and discord that is felt to be at odds with workplace harmony and the usual pecking order. Company superiors introduce ideas or pose questions to subordinates who, out of either respect or a desire to keep their jobs, agree – or at least do not disagree. Bound by norms of social grace, a desire for workplace cohesion, awareness of heirarchies, and aversion to conflict, intelligent employees waste time and money in meetings that do little to alter or redirect the status quo. 

This is a broad generalization no doubt, but its easy to see in action. Its also interesting to consider because management strategies and systems often focus on creating group cohesion. We often associate a lack of conflict with an abundance of understanding. Or the absence of dissent with the presence of agreement. Not so necessarily. While we may feel particularly enlightened because we all get along, it is more likely that we have yet to evolve to a higher state of organizational intelligence. How do you disagree without upsetting the peace?

Martin Meyer-Gossner, the author of the article linked above, suggests meeting leaders engage employees via social media such as blogs prior to the meeting as a way of generating ideas in an “input-first” strategy. People can give their thoughts and input on certain topics prior to the meeting when their ideas will be less affected by group harmony. He also explains that web-based discussions can help shorten meetings by serving as checklists. OneSmartWorld’s Smart Agenda Manager functions similarly by designating time for different styles of thinking – idea generation, information sharing, and decision making. Systems like the Smart Agenda Manager are easily be integrated with an “input-first” strategy by using the agenda’s time slots to reflect and build upon the information already gathered on the web.

The culture of business and meetings is changing as social mores, paradigms, and values change too. Social harmony was once tantamount and the pecking order carved in marble. Today, a more pluralist sun is rising. Related shifts are happening within corporate culture and even meetings. The fresh thinking is that its not important that we are all the same – there are different ways to be smart or good. It is important that we have a strategy for working together, even if it does involve the occasional disagreement. These disagreements often provoke the greatest innovation and just might be the key to success.

By Daniel St. Germaine