Putting aside for a moment the absolutely ridiculous, far-fetched dramatized story that takes up three-fourths of the book, this book's recommendations are apparently what happens when someone has only taken one screenwriting class (as the author admits) and has never worked as an actual, professional screenwriter. What makes a movie interesting isn't conflict just for the sake of conflict, but specifically an objective, an obstacle, and high stakes. An endless argument can be just as boring as status updates.
But this is a moot point. We don’t go to work to be entertained. We go to work to get paid, and to get paid, we have to get shit done. Suggesting that we sow conflict to keep each other entertained is just bizarre. You know what would be REALLY entertaining in a meeting?? If the boss confessed to having an affair with someone else in the room and then a dude was shocked because HE was also having an affair with that person and then the boss pulled out a gun and shot him. Pretty exciting! But not a productive meeting!
I kept wanting to scream at the author, "OBJECTIVES!!" The meetings I've been to that have been horrible have been so because it wasn’t clear what the point was, or my presence wasn’t necessary for attaining their objectives. Whether there's conflict while attaining objectives in a meeting or not is irrelevant. If people get in a room and immediately agree on everything such that they can proceed with their work, that's a super boring movie, but an interesting, productive, worthwhile meeting. If someone “mines for conflict,” they shouldn’t do so for fun but in a genuine attempt to flush out opposing ideas that may have an effect on the outcome of the objective.
By contrast, if someone in a meeting is rattling off details about things I have nothing to do with, that’s bad not because it’s boring per se or because it has no conflict but because I have nothing to do with it. It’s a waste of my time. It doesn’t help me advance any objectives.
I cannot believe this book is as widely praised as it is. The "story" is absurd, and, as best I can tell, just a paean to male privilege. (A male executive assistant! Can you imagine? Tee hee! And of course, being male unlike other EAs, he basically takes over the company! The dude would have been fired immediately for pulling this shit, but instead everyone listens to him raptly? Give me a break. Don’t quit your day job, Lencioni.) Most of the recommendations only brush up against the real heart of the issue with meetings but are ultimately off the mark. Ugh!
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
![Death by Meeting: A Leadership Fable...About Solving the Most Painful Problem in Business (J-B Lencioni Series Book 19) by [Patrick M. Lencioni]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51wEWrLk3yL._SY346_.jpg)
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
|
Audio CD, Audiobook, CD, Unabridged
"Please retry" | — | $9.62 |
Next 5 for you in this series
See full series
Total Price:
$81.00
More items to explore
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
From the brand
-
Patrick Lencioni is the pioneer of the organizational health movement and the author of 13 bestselling books, including, including The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, The Advantage, and The Ideal Team Player. For the past 25 years, Pat and his firm, The Table Group, have provided leaders with products and services to make their organizations more effective, their teams more cohesive, and their employees more fulfilled.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
From the Publisher
WHAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM WITH MEETINGS?
Meetings are boring because they lack drama. Or conflict. This is a shame because most meetings have plenty of potential for drama, which is essential for keeping human beings engaged. Unfortunately, rather than mining for that golden conflict, most leaders of meetings seem to be focused on avoiding tension and ending their meetings on time. And while these may seem noble pursuits, they lie at the heart of bad meetings.
To make meetings less boring, leaders must look for legitimate reasons to provoke and uncover relevant, constructive ideological conflict. By doing so, they'll keep people engaged, which leads to more passionate discussions, and ultimately, to better decisions.
Meetings are ineffective because they lack contextual structure. Too many organizations have only one kind of regular meeting, often called a staff meeting. Either once a week or twice a month, people get together for two to three hours of randomly focused discussion about everything from strategy to tactics, from administrivia to culture. Because there is no clarity around what topics are appropriate, there is no clear context for the various discussions that take place. In the end, little is decided because the participants have a hard time figuring out whether they're supposed to be debating, voting, brainstorming, weighing in, or just listening.
To make our meetings more effective, we need to have multiple types of meetings, and clearly distinguish between the various purposes, formats, and timing of those meetings.
THE FOUR MEETINGS
THE DAILY CHECK-IN is a schedule-oriented, administrative meeting that should last no more than five or 10 minutes. The purpose is simply to keep team members aligned and to provide a daily forum for activity updates and scheduling.
THE TACTICAL STAFF is what most people have come to know as staff meetings. These should be approximately an hour in length, give or take 20 minutes, and should focus on the discussion and resolution of issues which effect near term objectives.
THE AD-HOC TOPICAL is the most interesting kind of meeting for leaders, and the most important indicator of a company's strategic aptitude. It is the appropriate place for big topics, those that will have a long-term impact on the business. Each strategic meeting should include no more than one or two topics, and should allow roughly two hours for each topic.
THE QUARTERLY OFF-SITE REVIEW is an opportunity for team members to step away from business, literally and figuratively, to reassess a variety of issues: the interpersonal performance of the team, the company's strategy, the performance of top-tier and bottom-tier employees, morale, competitive threats, and industry trends. These can last anywhere from the better part of a day to two full days each quarter.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
A quick read with practical tips that you can use immediately to improve your meetings!
Reviewed in the United States on August 4, 2020
I love how Pat Lencioni uses a quick-read fable to roll out the practical ideas for improving business. Read this in 2 days, and was able to apply what I learned immediately to improving meetings for my team.
Reviewed in the United States on August 4, 2020
Images in this review
Top reviews from other countries
Christian
A unique twist on the age old problem
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on August 10, 2009
Warren
Great help to me getting teams together and meetings and outcomes meaningful
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on July 10, 2019
