/ Playing around with what format is the perfect meeting in.
Memo/Prep Materials:
- If I write a memo for persuasion, there is some level of crafting it into a narrative. If my goal is to persuade the reader, it may matter less that I prove to myself the details/nuances of an argument but rather how I shape it in a way that achieves my goal. This strays from seeking ground truth.
- In that case, I need to write a memo striving for objectivity. The “memo” is really just a collection of numbers, data, qualitative commentary, and on the next page some of my personal perspectives/opinions for others to read AFTER they have come to their own views (as to not contaminate their thinking). The goal is to avoid any bias, suggested direction, or even major conclusion from said memo. The second page can have all of your takeaways/conclusions/subjective reasonings.
- Clip from Lex Fridman (podcaster/researcher) on Jeff Bezos (founder of Amazon) talking about this powerpoint vs. memo debate here
Process for Internal Meeting:
- On Slack channel: at meeting time start, key person shares materials and commentary
- Prep time need not be scheduled
- Maybe you experiment with sending materials morning of, or hour before, to allow a bit more digestion time or for people to do some research for their individual additions/follow-ups to share broadly
- Key person need already have written commentary and materials
- At meeting time start, people start reviewing and have section for clarification questions to be asked
- People who put together materials answer questions here
- Alongside clarification questions, people start posting threads on thoughts
- Key here is for key person to send like some invisible ink, such that a reader can read the materials, think on their own commentary, take some notes down, THEN read the key person’s commentary (to avoid contamination of individuals’s thoughts)
- Other people can reply to these thoughts in different/similar threads
- Then either in text or on Slack call, share from most junior to most senior person thoughts to help reach consensus. If consensus reach, make decision and/or outline next step with tagging specific people. If no consensus, key decision maker either makes decision, specifies important follow-ups to inform group/single decision, or circles back later after they’ve had more time to digest if necessary.
- Benefits: You can have a much more messy/imaginative discussion on chat with everything documented, multiple threads/questions ongoing, and people can look items up on the fly.
- Disadvantage: While only one person can talk at a time, they usually can say more than they can type. They also can have free-flow thoughts to help the group push limits/explore thinking vs. when you are writing, subconsciously you need to translate your words to text and it may potentially impact creativity? I think text does enable more constant gathering of opinions: say you have one person writting something. Two other people can be writing replies: all can upvote or downvote the idea for super quick feedback.
- Using text to distribute information is so underrated.
TO ADD MORE LATER ?
