Etiquette

How to Minute a Meeting

September 28, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

How to Minute a Meeting If you’re the unlucky minute-taker tasked with recording a discussion for the benefit of posterity, remember that minutes are expected to contain essentially a reliable record of what transpired at the meeting, key decisions taken, and action items.

In principle, meetings exist for people to inform and decide, but, in reality, lots of what people say in meetings will be trivial, pointless, and unhelpful. Unless specifically required by the forum, you don’t have to scribble down each and every pearl of wisdom that ensues. Per Wikipedia, the term “minutes” derives from the Latin minuta scriptura (“small writing,”) meaning “rough notes.”

The BBC political satire Yes, Prime Minister (1986–88; prequel Yes Minister, 1980–84,) that masterly class on politics, manipulation, and being manipulated, has particularly handy advice on meeting minutes. From the ‘Man Overboard’ (clip) and ‘Official Secrets’ (clip) episodes,

A minute is a note for the records and a statement of action, if any, that was agreed upon.

It is characteristic of all discussions and decisions that every meeting member has a vivid recollection of them and that every member’s recollection of them differs violently from every other member’s recollection. Consequently, we accept the convention that the official decisions are those and only those which have officially recorded in the minutes by the officials … if a decision had been officially reached, it would have been officially recorded in the minutes by the officials.

The purpose of minutes is not to record events, it is to protect people.

People frequently change their minds during a meeting. Therefore, what is said at a meeting merely constitutes the choice of ingredients for the minutes. The minute-taker’s task is to choose, from a jumble of ill-digested ideas, a version that represents the [powerful person’s] views as he would, on reflection, have liked them to emerge.

Minutes do not record everything that was said at a meeting. Minutes are constructive—they are to improve what is said, to be tactful, to put in better order.

Minutes, by virtue of the selection process, can never be a true and complete record. Minutes don’t constitute a true record.

You’ll have to maintain a Zen-like focus on why everybody disagrees with somebody and how nobody agrees to do what anybody could have done. But you don’t have to work hard to keep yourself awake either.

As soon as you’ve circulated those minutes and got them approved, you can file them away. Nobody may ever actually read them in the future.

Flattery Will Get You Nowhere

August 11, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Flattery has had a bad name since the Greeks. Over 2,000 years ago, Publilius Syrus, the Latin writer of mimes and dramatic sketches, warned, “Flattery was formerly a vice; it has now become the fashion.”

Flattery continues to be an obligatory weapon in all manner of political and personal influence. Richard Stengel’s A Brief History of Flattery (2000) lists over 200 synonyms for “to flatter” and “flattery.”

A trio of marketing professors conducted a set of experiments using a sunglasses kiosk. The sales clerks flattered customers either during the sale, after the sale, or not at all. Then, researchers asked the shoppers to evaluate the trustworthiness of the clerks.

Turns out that the customers could see through it. Flattery, whether it comes during or after the sale, reduced the customer’s perception of the clerk’s trustworthiness. Without conscious reflection, flattery made the customers distrust the salesclerks:

Our findings show that even when it was obvious the compliment didn’t serve any underlying sales motive, the participants didn’t trust what the sales agent had to say.

In a way, it’s sad that the marketplace has become so suspicious, but it seems that when someone flatters us, we get our back up even if it’s not called for. It’s the consumers’ default position to react negatively to what is perceived as an attempt to manipulate them.

Idea for Impact: Don’t try to sway anybody by unsavory flattery and ingratiation.

Flattery is an inducement that seems great initially but leaves a horrid aftertaste. People will eat up your flattery if they’re starving for affection, but undue adulation isn’t as appealing as honest, sincere appreciation.

What’s Wrong With Giving Advice

August 10, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

“It is a pleasure to give advice, humiliating to need it, normal to ignore it,” somebody once remarked.

What really happens when you offer advice is … you instinctively send a message to the other person that they don’t have the resources to solve the problem themselves.

Your advice is probably rooted in your expectations, not in the understanding of the other

The best way to give advice is to not give any advice at all but to listen attentively and emphatically.

People who relate their problems don’t really want your advice, even if they seek to sound you out about a problem.

They want you to listen to their problem, perhaps ask open-ended questions to help them think through the problem, and help them explore the options they have.

People Want You to Listen, Not to Talk

Clinical psychologist Lisa Damour notes that parents can’t help but offer direct solutions to their kids’ problems. In her insightful ‘Adolescence’column for the New York Times, Damour suggests,

Rushing in with suggestions carries the risk that it may strike our teenagers as a vote of no confidence when they are mainly seeking our reassurance that they can handle whatever life throws at them.

Instead of proposing solutions, we might bolster adolescents as they sort things out. Saying, “I’ve seen you get through things like this before” or “This is tough, but you are too” can effectively loan teenagers a bit of perspective and confidence when their own feels shaken.

Even teenagers who have already addressed a problem may still seek our reassurance. [A teenager] said she sometimes tells her parents “about a situation and what I did to solve it” in order to get validation that she made the right choice. When this happens, she says she’s “not really looking for their solution, just checking that they think I did the right thing with my limited problem-solving experience.”

Adolescents often feel vulnerable, perhaps especially so when they open up to adults about their jams and scrapes. In these moments, well-intentioned guidance can land like criticism, and lectures or “I-told-you-so”s—however warranted—may feel like outright attacks.

More often than not, offering our teenagers an ear, empathy, and encouragement gives them what they came for. If your teenager wants help solving the problem, divide the issue into categories: what can be changed and what cannot. For the first type, focus on the needs your teenager identifies and work together to brainstorm solutions. For the second type, help them come to terms with the things they cannot control.

Often People Want You to Listen—Sharing is an Act of Self-Reflection

When people open the door of their confidence, tread delicately.

Open the ear of your heart. Don’t impose your perspective, but help them find a solution that works for them.

To empathize, say, “You are in a tough situation,” “gee, that stinks, it totally not fair to you,” “I understand why you feel this way,” “You have every right to be offended,” or “I’m so sorry you have to face this kind of difficulty right now.”
To help clarify, say, “I might be wrong, but it seems to me …,” “Are you concerned that …,” or “what if ….”
To expand perspective, say, “This may seem like a big deal at this time, but how will you feel about this in a week? A month? A year?” or “what do you think is the worst fallout of this?”

Idea for Impact: Often, the Best Advice You Can Give is Not Providing Any At All

If pressed to offer an opinion, tease out the options they’re considering. Ask, “What do you think you ought to do?” or “What would you like to happen?”

Don’t offer a solution that pleases you more than it does the other. The best solution to a problem somebody is facing is the one that works for the other person, not you.

Undertake Not What You Cannot Perform

July 16, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Each time you break a promise or commitment, even to yourself, you chip away at your claim—and your intention—to be a responsible, reliable, self-aware person.

Making promises and keeping them is how you build integrity, how you foster relationships of trust, and, more importantly, how you learn to trust yourself.

Every time you break a promise, your word has less value.

Giving your word is a serious undertaking, even on trivial matters. Never ever make a promise that you think there is even the slightest chance that you may break.

Idea for Impact: Don’t make a promise if a situation warrants a more open-ended response.

We Live in a Lookist Society

July 2, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

From Irmgard Schlögl’s The Wisdom of the Zen Masters (1976,)

Wealthy donors invited Master Ikkyū to a banquet.

The Master arrived there dressed in beggar’s robes. His host, not recognizing him in this garb, hustled him away: “We cannot have you here at the doorstep. We are expecting the famous Master Ikkyū any moment.”

The Master went home, there changed into his ceremonial robe of purple brocade, and again presented himself at his host’s doorstep.

He was received with due respect, and ushered into the banquet room. There, he put his stiff robe on the cushion, saying, “I expect you invited the robe since you showed me away a little while ago,” and left.

That what you wear affects how others will perceive you is well-known empirically and has been established in scientific literature. People dressed conservatively, for example, are seen as more composed and trustworthy, whereas those dressed bold and suave are viewed as more attractive and self-assured. Women who wear menswear-inspired dress suits are more likely to be perceived well in job interviews. Men are shown to misperceive women’s friendliness as sexual intent, particularly when the women are dressed suggestively.

In the Second Quarto (1604) of Hamlet, Shakespeare, in the voice of the Polonius, declares, “For the apparrell oft proclaimes the man.” Mark Twain seemingly pronounced, “Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.”

Several maxims remark about the notion that an individual’s clothing is confirmation for his/her personal, professional, and social identity:

In Egypt: “لبس البوصة، تبقى عروسة” or “Dressing up a stick turns it into a doll”
In China: “我们在外面判断这件衣服, 在家里我们判断这个人” or “Abroad we judge the dress; at home we judge the man”
In Japan: “馬子にも衣装” or “Even a packhorse driver would look great in fine clothes”
In Korea: “옷이 날개다” or “Clothes are wings”

Idea for Impact: We live in a lookist society. Always dress the part. Ignore this at your own peril.

Don’t Let the Latecomers Ruin Your Meeting

June 29, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Latecomers not only demoralize and disrespect those who turn up on time and have to wait around but also hurt the meeting’s productivity—especially if you have a tight and structured schedule.

Always start and end your meeting at the appointed time. Are your attendees tardy because they know that you don’t start the meeting promptly? Do you tend to wander off-topic?
Confirm that there’re enough chairs in the meeting room. A latecomer can disrupt a discussion by dragging chairs over from other meeting rooms.
Don’t reprimand or embarrass a latecomer during the meeting. Speak to her later. Does she understand that she has a clearly defined role in this meeting? (People are often late to events because they’re not entirely convinced about whether they really want—or need—to be there.)
Don’t go over an agenda item to help a latecomer catch up. Recapitulate the key points only if the latecomer’s inputs are necessary to what’s left on the agenda.
If you have a chronic latecomer, check if he has a schedule-conflict. Confirm that his participation is still relevant. If he doesn’t want to—or need not—attend the entire meeting, pull him to the top of the agenda. Let him contribute and leave.
Try to corral the chronic latecomers by stopping by their desks en route to the meeting.
Could you make the meeting more beneficial for all your attendees? Invite suggestions for mutual gain so that everyone feels more productive.

Also, be alert to power trippers who get a small thrill in keeping others waiting, and then requiring you to start over or recapitulate when they arrive.

Let’s Not Talk About Trump

March 9, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

If you feel like you’ve been overdosing on news and conversations related to politics and Trump, much to the exclusion of other meaningful subjects, try the “No Trump Rule” evoked by essayist Joseph Epstein in the Wall Street Journal:

Every Friday I meet for lunch with three or four friends from high school days. I instituted at these lunches what I called the No Trump Rule: ‘No’ not in the sense of being against Trump’s politics but against talking about him at all, for doing so seems to get everyone worked up unduly. The rule, I have to report, has been broken more than the Ten Commandments. No one, apparently, can stop talking about our president. The Trump talk quickly uses up most of the oxygen in any room where it arises, and can bring an argument to the shouting stage more quickly than a divorce settlement.

Look, I understand that everybody has been amped up to eleven since Trump emerged as the Republican Party’s nominee in May 2016, but some of us don’t want to talk about him—or politics.

I, for one, don’t think it’s a good idea for so much of our news, talk shows, and social media feeds to be devoted to a single subject for this long. Yes, Trump is a polarizing figure, and our country is so divided. But we don’t need to let him, and the anger he provokes, besiege every moment of our lives.

Awareness and activism are vital to civic duty, but hatred isn’t meaningful activism

I’m happy to listen to everybody’s opinions, but I’m fatigued by the extent to which politics dominates present-day exchanges. Ordinary conversations about routine topics tend to degenerate quickly with any evocation of the current state of affairs. Even banter about the weather (“the last refuge of the unimaginative” per Oscar Wilde) can quickly spiral into climate change, the environment, fossil fuels, oil, Russia, Putin, and so on.

More than anything else, I can’t bear the way most people currently think about politics—in particular, how ill-informed they tend to be. I am dismayed at people’s shallow understanding of the significant issues of the day—immigration, trade, nationalism, economic inequality, healthcare, etc. The stakes are high, and, given the depth of people’s political convictions, their anger is understandable. Nevertheless, the propensity to lash out against those with different views and dehumanize them is deplorable.

I will talk about politics with people who aren’t as much interested in winning an argument and convincing opposing people of the wrongness of their positions as they are about understanding more fully why others hold a particular conviction.

Our values, not politicians, should mold the policies and positions we support

Sarah Stewart Holland and Beth Silvers’ commendable I Think You’re Wrong (But I’m Listening): A Guide to Grace-Filled Political Conversations (2019) proposes a framework for having productive political discussions with those you love and yet disagree with.

Somewhere along the way we stopped disagreeing with each other and started hating each other. We are enemies, and our side is engaged in an existential battle for the very soul of the country. We are no longer working toward common goals. We are no longer building something together. Our sole objective is tearing the other side down. Nothing short of total victory is acceptable.

…

The reality is that we never stopped talking politics altogether—we stopped talking politics with people who disagree with us. We changed “you shouldn’t talk about politics” to “you should talk only to people who reinforce your worldview.” Instead of giving ourselves the opportunity to be molded and informed and tested by others’ opinions, we allowed our opinions and our hearts to harden.

The authors, hosts of a popular discussion-podcast, invite readers “to hear each other’s thoughts, to test our own beliefs against each other’s philosophies, and to better appreciate our own core beliefs by having to articulate and challenge those beliefs.” They emphasize an earnest curiosity for the counterargument and the open-mindedness to leave room for nuance:

Engaging with other people is never easy, but it always will be worth it. Engaging with other people about politics is no different. Let yourself take that chance. Let yourself rise to the challenge. Your ability to stretch and grow will surprise you, and so will the people around you. Once people see you as a person willing to have thoughtful, curious, calm discussions, you will have all kinds of interesting conversations that seemed impossible a year ago.

Postscript: Things are far more awkward in the workplace. Politics has always been a sensitive topic—but in today’s contentious climate, such conversations can rapidly escalate into arguments.

What Happens When You Talk About Too Many Goals

February 28, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Matthew Pritchett's cartoon: Labour For the Many Brexit Positions Not the Few

To supplement this illustrious sketch by the British cartoonist Matt Pritchett, an excerpt from HuffPost’s article on “How Jeremy Corbyn Lost The Election,”

One big problem was the sheer size of the [Labour Party] manifesto and the number of policies on offer. Candidates complained that they didn’t have a single five-point pledge card like the one Tony Blair made famous. While the Tories had a simple message of ‘Get Brexit Done,’ Labour lacked a similarly easy ‘doorstep offer.’ “We had so much in the manifesto we almost had too much,” one senior source said. “It felt like none of it was cutting through. You needed to boil it down.”

“We tried to give a retail offer and also a grand vision and ended up falling between the two stools. To get across ‘you’ll be better off with Labour,’ we should have made our position clearer much earlier.”

Idea for Impact: Distill your goals into simple messages that others will find relevant and timely. When it comes to persuasion, clarity and conciseness are critical. Weak messages meander. Smart messages immediately express what’s important and help rally your resources towards your mission.

The Poolguard Phenomenon

February 24, 2020 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Even Petty Power Corrupts

Ever wondered why some people in a position of power, but without the concomitant rank or status, tend to exert their power unreasonably?

People in menial jobs can have, within their petty fiefdoms, the ability to inconvenience people. Rub a TSA agent the wrong way, for example, and you could be signaled for expanded screening. Summer-time poolguards can be seen checking excessively over kids and parents who show no deference to the poolguards’ authority. At bureaucratic offices, clerks and stern supervisors sometimes impose petty rules that must be followed for the sake of the rules—and nobody likes dealing with them!

The power tripper’s fragile ego hinges on exerting his/her power.

Power Increases People’s Sense of Entitlement

The Poolguard Phenomenon: Even Petty Power Corrupts This anecdotal fact seems to be substantiated by this study, titled “The Destructive Nature of Power Without Status.” The researchers make a case that neither power nor low status independently provokes people to mistreat others. Rather, the combination of these two facets of social interaction makes abuse that much more likely.

We predicted that when people have a role that gives them power but lacks status—and the respect that comes with that status—then it can lead to demeaning behaviors. Put simply, it feels bad to be in a low-status position and the power that goes with that role gives them a way to take action on those negative feelings.

One way to prevent such power dynamics is to find ways to make all individuals feel respected and valued irrespective of the status of their roles. “Respect assuages negative feelings about their low-status roles and leads them to treat others positively.” Courtesy pays!

Notes

Some people will despise anyone they suspect is exerting power over them.
Compare to the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment, in which a group of students was appointed either prisoners or guards in a mocked-up prison. Although all the participants understood they were part of a simulation, the “guards” treated the “prisoners” in extremely humiliating ways because, per the researchers, the guards recognized that they lacked respect and admiration in the eyes of others. (This controversial experiment was the subject of a 2015 docudrama.)
Compare to the concept of the Napoleon Complex, through which, shorter men could overcompensate for their height by means of social aggressiveness. (Napoleon wasn’t short.)
Cf. The “Waiter Rule” states that how you treat seemingly insignificant people says a lot about your personality and priorities.

Etiquette

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Your advice is probably rooted in your expectations, not in the understanding of the other

People Want You to Listen, Not to Talk

Often People Want You to Listen—Sharing is an Act of Self-Reflection

Idea for Impact: Often, the Best Advice You Can Give is Not Providing Any At All

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Awareness and activism are vital to civic duty, but hatred isn’t meaningful activism

Our values, not politicians, should mold the policies and positions we support

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Even Petty Power Corrupts

Power Increases People’s Sense of Entitlement

Notes

Wondering what to read next?