The other day, a lady shared her frustrating experience of attending an evening class which she was fond of. Apparently, a new member who kept talking incessantly had joined. No matter the subject matter, she would incessantly talk about herself, paying utterly no heed to any courteous attempts to check her relentless chatter. This turned the class into a dreadful bore.
“Why does the tutor not ask her to keep quiet?” I enquired.
“He is incapable,” replied the lady. “He’s clueless on how to approach it.”
Hearing this, my initial reaction was that the tutor wasn’t fit to oversee any type of gathering. However, it also highlighted how valuable it is to have the capability to interrupt those loquacious individuals whose endless talk turns work meetings into torture.
Those who consider this as a trivial issue are mistaken.
It has been estimated by researchers that in 2015 workers in the US attended around 55 million meetings each day, rocketing to over 80 million in the pandemic year of 2020. It is projected that by 2022 there were still 62 million meetings at a minimum.
Quantifying how many meetings were ruined by monotonous loudmouths is trying because our judgement of meetings depends on whether we chaired them or not.
According to an authority on US meetings, Prof Steven Rogelberg, meeting conveners consistently rank their meetings higher than non- conveners. And if you are a chatterbox in a meeting (like many conveners tend to be), then chances are you’ll perceive everything as going just fine.
However, Rogelberg’s surveys revealed that 15% of employees overall grade their meetings as “unsatisfactory or very unsatisfactory”.
There could be a plethora of contributing factors to this, like the perennially tardy, the quiet observer, the critic who squashes innovation, and most infuriatingly, the regular meeting that wasn’t required in the first place.
Even assuming that only a minor part of this 15% feel this way due to their meetings being dominated by incessant talkers, it still denotes a considerable amount of meetings that have been ruined by irrelevant or distracting chatter. This possibly accounts for the growing proliferation of books on meeting conduct.
Several tactics, including those for participants who are not leaders, have been identified. These individuals may courteously interject with a query like ‘Apologies, may I confirm my understanding of that?’
Amazon provides a range of books on effective meeting strategies, including the 2022’s ‘How to Chair an Effective Meeting’, 2021’s ‘Hold Successful Meetings’, and 2004’s ‘Death by Meeting’. Moreover, Rogelberg’s in-depth ‘The Surprising Science of Meetings’ became available in 2019. He continued his research with a new publication this year revolving around one-on-one meetings titled ‘Glad We Met.’
As a newspaper employee, I must admit that these books provide a sense of gratitude for the nature of our work, where short meetings are necessitated by tight timelines, challenging would-be procrastinators. Additionally, the role of a journalist often involves chairing panel discussions, thereby refining the art of poised interruption.
A fellow employee makes it a point to inform the speakers about his loud and aggressive phone alarm that will interrupt the discussions if they extend beyond the assigned time, proving to be a successful strategy in keeping time. Some others simply apologize in advance to the panellists, stating that they will be abruptly interrupted if they indulge in long-winded speeches or dull the audience’s interest, thereby encroaching on fellow panellists’ time.
Returning to the office, the game changes, demanding subtler approaches.
Effective meeting leaders often practise setting definite deadlines for meetings and identifying domineering speakers who inhibit other participants. It then becomes comfortable to interrupt such individuals by reminding them about the ticking time and then gently steering the conversation towards another participant.
A popular trend among some leaders is the ‘jellyfish rule’. If a participant feels that the conversation is being sidetracked or drifting pointlessly, they can simply state “jellyfish” to interrupt and bring the discussion back on track. Although this approach is deemed fun and productive, it might not appeal to everyone, reminiscent of a scene from ‘The Office’.
There are several strategies to interrupt a meeting, especially for non-leaders, including one where they courteously interject to ensure their understanding of the discussion or to contribute their views.
Dealing with verbose meeting leaders, however, demands tact, where attendees must assert their upcoming commitments, giving them the chance to glance at their watch, heave a sigh and introduce the much-anticipated closing discussion, ‘Oh, would you look at the time, is there anything else we need to discuss?’ © The Financial Times Limited 2024.
Register for business alert notifications to get top news, analyses, and comments straight on your mobile device. Keep yourself updated by following The Irish Times on WhatsApp. Listen to our weekly Inside Business podcast for cutting-edge insights – check out the newest episode here.