CNBC Follow the leader episode #103 is a profile of Gary Vaynerchuck... I admire his hustle but 10 minute meetings are either extremely efficient or an opportunity to check on work that possibly was reported on a day before or even earlier the same day.
Considering the speed of information, the goal seems to not keep pace but move (meaning develop content, value products & offerings) faster than the speed of information... This seems to be such a reactionary approach to business management and where is the time to plan and strategize? Can a strategic decision making methodology be developed in 10 minutes? Or is there enough trust with directors and line managers to co
me up with the perspectives that will take the company into the future?... is it a situation where comprehensive solutions developed by senior leaders just need the blessing of the CEO or is every step of the resulting process having to be OK'd by the CEO? There has to be a substantial amount of trust in the leadership team or the exact opposite to keep this business from grinding to a dysfunctional halt. One scenario could be that, where a typical meeting would take 1 or 2 hours to get consensus or flush out all the details, one could break it up into micro-meetings... 5-10 sub-meetings which were made popular by Google in hyper-creative Silicon Valley. It may be convenient but wouldn't that actually extend a meeting from an hour or two into maybe a day or more? Not necessarily, it really depends on the expectations set by the leader... Here is some insight on micro-meetings and other C-level concerns by technology company heads Run your meeting like a Boss. Maybe I'm just a traditionalist or a glutton for punishment for leaning toward the two hour drag through the mud but there may be some value in micro-meetings in the information age... Let me know what you think about the micro-meetings and their effectiveness at email@example.com, or on Twitter @BizOpsGeek.