Put a period to unstructured meetings

We have all participated in a meeting that had absolutely no form or structure, where people just talked about random things, high and low in a mishmash, and which took forever since it was so unstructured. For some people I meet, quite a few of their regular meetings are somewhat along those lines, and considering how many meetings they attend each week, they are unfortunately wasting a considerable amount of time.

For you who prefer listening to reading, this post is also available as an episode of the “Done!” podcast:

Of course, we want our meetings to be efficient so that they result in what we want out of them. The question is just how to make that happen. There are countless tips and tricks on how to make meetings more efficient, and recently Pontus Bergdahl gave me a tip I have never encountered before.

The three P:s

He wrote and told me about how when he has a meeting that he himself can influence, he uses a model for preparation that is summed up by three words beginning with the letter P. Before the meeting, he thinks about the:

Purpose: Why are we having this meeting? What are we aiming to accomplish? What problem are we attempting to solve (or the likes)?
Process: How should we have the meeting, meaning, who should lead it? Do we need to show any images or powerpoint-slides? Who will take notes? Who will keep track of time (I added this bit, though)?
Payoff: What issues will you have addressed and what decisions need to be made by the end of the meeting, in order to call it a day and consider it a productive one?

The three P:s will give the meeting a more stable structure to lean on so that the purpose is fulfilled and the time spent efficiently.

Do this

If you want to try it out for yourself and see if Pontus’ model will make your meetings more productive, then do this:

Take a look in the calendar and look for an appropriate meeting which you will be leading and for which you could try applying the three P:s.
Right now, book a block of time in your calendar for preparation sometime between now and the meeting during which you answer the P‑questions in the model.
Have the meeting and then evaluate what difference the model made.

Neither Pontus nor I know what the origins of the model are and during my research, I have discovered that the P:s can stand for different things depending on who is using the model. If you want to, you could, for instance, add more P:s such as:

Participants: Who will attend the meeting?
People: Are everyone involved in the meeting? Is the presence of all attendees really necessary, and is every person’s presence used in the most optimal way?
Product: What do you want the result of the meeting to be (a P similar to Payoff, if you ask me)?

Make it matter

If you use this model or think of some other way to improve how you conduct your meetings and what you want them to result in, it will be much easier to fulfill the purpose of the meetings. It will also become easier for you and the other participants to remain focused during the meeting on why you are meeting, which will result in getting more done in the same, or even shorter, time than you otherwise might.

Any other ideas?

Do you have some variation of the 3P-model that you use and that has made your meetings better and more structured? I’m all ears and I’m sure other readers are too — please feel free to share your thoughts in an email to me.

(Speaking of meetings, here’s how Google keep their meetings efficient (allegedly)!

There's more!

A woman in a beige coat and scarf is standing on the street, looking at her phone with a white luxury car parked behind her.

If you want more tips on how to create good structure at work, there are many ways to get that from me - in podcasts, videos, books, talks and other formats.

Yes, I want more tips!