Shorter meetings are not always better
"I feel that a one-on-one should last an hour at minimum. Anything less, in my experience, tends to make the subordinate confine himself to simple things that can be handled quickly."
— Andy Grove, Former CEO of Intel
By putting an artificial time limit on your meetings, you create a bias towards only discussing simple and easy-to-solve problems.
But business can be complex.
Many topics often require more time for a thorough discussion or analysis.
Senior managers need context and should aim to facilitate open discussion and the exchange of ideas.
The goal is not to rush through a task list.
Longer meetings and maintaining a high-quality flow of information will lead to better decision-making for the organization.
So what did Andy Grove suggest managers do to have effective one-on-one meetings?
1. The employee should set a clear agenda for the meeting beforehand.
"Somebody needs to prepare for the meeting. The supervisor with eight subordinates would have to prepare eight times; the subordinate only once. So the latter should be asked to prepare an outline."
2. A quick touch base is not a replacement for an in-depth one-on-one.
"There is an enormous difference between a casual encounter by a supervisor and a subordinate, or even a meeting (mission-oriented) to resolve a specific problem."
3. Efficient and effective delegation can only occur if there is a two-way flow of information.
"This happens through the development of a common base of information and similar ways of doing and handling things between the supervisor and the subordinate."
I know the productivity gurus have convinced many that listening to a podcast at 2X speed or reading a Greek classic per week is the key to self-improvement.
But for 2023, aim to increase your depth of understanding rather than the volume of information ingested. I know I am.
