|
|
October 2, 2006
A few weeks ago, I was sitting in a room, waiting for a meeting to begin. The participants included 13 leadership members ranging from the chief of radiology and vice president of diagnostic services to the vice president of finance and the executive director of HIM. One person was missing: the executive chief business officer. The meeting objectives had already been distributed, but we all knew from past experience that it was futile to begin the meeting without this person. Arriving late, the chief business officer would require us to go back over the agenda by reviewing the discussions and conclusions. Additionally, the meeting would be directed down other pathways than what was established for the time or what was prepared. The deputy to the chief of business operations called to determine his whereabouts. “I am on my way over” was the response. We all looked at our watches and knew it would take at least another 10 minutes. The group continued their nonsensical discussions, trying not to think about the work left behind or the lunch they skipped to be on time for this 12:30 meeting. Ten minutes came and went. Finally, after another 10 minutes passed, the vice president of financial services said, “The best way to bring late guests to any meal is to begin eating.” The vice president called the meeting to order and sure enough, right on queue, the chief business officer, now 45 minutes late, arrived. Two years ago, I published an article called “The Power of the 15-Minute Meeting.” It was a reflection on how much can be accomplished in 15 minutes when there is focus to the meeting and the appropriate participants are present. I wrote it from the perspective of being a director and the one calling the meeting. In attending many meetings over the past months as a participant, I kept asking myself whether the concepts from the 15-minute meeting could be applied to any type of meeting and regardless of the role played at the meeting. I learned that it is much easier to apply the concepts as the chairperson. It did get me thinking about the following questions: • How do you know when you have been to a good meeting? • Who was there? • What actions were taken from the information provided at the meeting? • What were the conclusions from the meeting? • What happened with those conclusions? • How did each participant help make the meeting worthwhile? I then brought myself back to the worst meeting I have attended and pondered the question, “Is it possible that unorganized meetings are intentional to reach objectives other than to keep organizational initiatives moving forward?” In investigating this theory, I thought about what made meetings ineffective and listed questions to help determine whether the meeting was typical for its subject matter, membership, and intended accomplishments, or an opportunity to restructure it for more constructive outcomes. • Was there an agenda? • Was the chairperson prepared? • What was the nature of the discussion? • Were the proper participants present? • What was decided? • At what point did the meeting go bad? • Was there anything good about the meeting? • What was the role of each person at the meeting? • Could anyone other than the chair have done anything to improve the meeting? • What can be learned from how the meeting was facilitated? Work and organizational experience tells us that the significance of a meeting is determined by the following: • the chairperson; • participants; • purpose of the meeting; • frequency of the meeting; and • preparation required. Daily, weekly, and monthly meetings called by managers or their designees may carry varying degrees of significance depending on the agenda and the status of functions under review. Informational monthly meetings are seen as less formal than daily and weekly status updates where staff is required to review goals and objectives and the progress of each work product and function. The mission of an organization and its culture also set the significance of meetings and the working environment in general. I had the opportunity to work for the AHIMA when it was called the American Medical Record Association. The Council on Education met biannually to review topics related to associate and baccalaureate-level health information programs. The agenda was set well in advance. Members of the council included representatives from all over the country. Each member arriving to the headquarter office in Chicago was clear on the objectives to be completed in the three-day timeframe and the impact their decisions would have on more than 200 individual HIM programs throughout the country. The 15-minute meeting evolved from putting all these elements together. It came from the necessity to waste no time and expect results, problem solving, and participation from appropriate staff. The 15-minute meeting came from focus and purpose to be achieved with the following: • expectation of outcomes; • respect of each participant’s contribution; • preparation by the chair and participants; and • identification of next steps and assignments from each meeting. This type of meeting carries a lot of power. It requires managers to identify and use the proper data profiles and reports. It requires staff to be organized to answer exactly where their function is or the status of a project. Outcomes from this meeting type can result in staff becoming proficient in preparing data reports and presenting information and issues in a constructive manner. Additionally, staff becomes enthused by the successes of staying focused on objectives as demonstrated by increased revenue, reduced days in accounts receivable, and increased accuracy of insurance information for a patient population base. The 15-minute meeting can easily be used as an indicator to measure certain aspects of an organization and its human resource. Management and staff can call a status meeting; however, conducting business in this format requires an individual and organization to demonstrate qualities of the following: • ownership; • purpose; • direction; and • expectation of conclusion. Management and staff who have no vision for a project or assignment and no expectation of status reports are not likely to command an effective process. Likewise, an organization without a plan and expectation of its work force is not likely to command the respect of its human resources. This can lead to uncertain progress and strategy meetings held before and after official meetings to undermine an organization’s true mission. Organizations use meetings as a common tool to accomplish work objectives. The time spent in meetings consumes hours not spent completing actual work. Think back on the last meeting you attended and take a minute to complete the survey that accompanies this article. How will you impact the next 15-minute meeting you chair or attend as a participant? — Barbara Bosler, MS, RHIA, is a Michigan-based
consultant in business practice healthcare functions.
|
 |