Virtual Meetings: Dealing with Inattention

Inattention in virtual meetings is a common source of frustration. But that frustration is often unjustified, because many virtual meeting leads have yet to take two necessary steps. The first is to set standards of attentiveness — behavioral norms. Here are some examples of behaviors that reduce meeting effectiveness.

Eating

In face-to-face meetings eating does happen, but the costs there are much lower, because communication is more effective in face-to-face meetings than it is in virtual meetings. In virtual meetings, where we might depend solely on electronic channels, and where audio channel quality can be marginal, eating during the meeting can degrade the meeting's effectiveness.

Electronic activities unrelated to the meeting

Electronic activities of all kinds — games, gambling, texting, viewing videos, enhancing Facebook pages, listening to music, and dozens more — all compete for attention. They are incompatible with full participation. Still, some electronic activities are actually part of the meeting — viewing a presentation, attending to the conversation, checking one's calendar for compatibility with a proposed meeting. But everything unrelated to the meeting ought to be off limits.

Conversation with those not attending

Officemates or passersby sometimes visit attendees who are at work; children, spouses, neighbors, or pets sometimes visit When people want distractions,
they find them. What
can we do about all this?with attendees who are at home. It's tempting for attendees to mute their phones and engage in conversation while the meeting continues. This behavior might be acceptable in emergencies, but in emergencies attendees should just sign off.

Conversation with those attending

Sidebar conversations are distracting. They occur more often in conference rooms in which everyone in the room is connected to the meeting through a speakerphone or video, but they can also occur over alternative phone or video links, or via text. All sidebars, in whatever medium, degrade meeting effectiveness.

Rearranging desk drawer contents, sorting, and filing

Office housekeeping chores might seem to be mindless at first, but they can quickly capture the brain when the housekeeper encounters something that has to be read. That's where inattentiveness sets in.

Pairing socks

For those participating from home, actual housekeeping is a temptation. There's nothing special about pairing socks; any distracting household chore can be corrosive.

When people want distractions, they find them. What can we do about all this?

Seeking cooperation is the second too-often-omitted step for increasing attentiveness. Ask attendees to develop and agree to attentiveness norms. And it helps to appoint a timekeeper, a parking lot valet, a designated digression detector, and a queue manager, because people who accept these responsibilities are compelled to be more attentive.

In exchange, offer five-minute breaks every 20 minutes. This concedes nothing, because attendees will take breaks or self-distract with or without permission. As a virtual meeting lead, you can't choose to skip breaks. You can only choose when they happen, and whether everyone breaks at the same time.

That's all I have for now. Time to go pair my socks.  Top    Next Issue

Do you spendyour days scurrying from meeting to meeting? Do you ever wonder if all these meetings are really necessary? (They aren't) Or whether there isn't some better way to get this work done? (There is) Read 101 Tips for Effective Meetings to learn how to make meetings much more productive and less stressful — and a lot more rare. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Effective Meetings:

Plopping

When we offer a contribution to a discussion, and everyone ignores it and moves on, we sometimes feel that our contribution has "plopped." We feel devalued. Rarely is this interpretation correct. What is going on?

TINOs: Teams in Name Only

Perhaps the most significant difference between face-to-face teams and virtual or distributed teams is their potential to develop from workgroups into true teams — an area in which virtual or distributed teams are at a decided disadvantage. Often, virtual and distributed teams are teams in name only.

When the Chair Is a Bully: I

Most meetings have Chairs or "leads." Although the expression that the Chair "owns" the meeting is usually innocent shorthand, some Chairs actually believe that they own the meeting. This view is almost entirely destructive. What are the consequences of this attitude, and what can we do about it?

Agenda Despots: I

Many of us abhor meetings. Words like boring, silly, and waste come to mind. But for some meeting Chairs, meetings aren't boring at all, because they fear losing control of the agenda. To maintain control, they use the techniques of the Agenda Despots.

What Groupthink Isn't

The term groupthink is tossed around fairly liberally in conversation and on the Web. But it's astonishing how often it's misused and misunderstood. Here are some examples.

See also Effective Meetings and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings

Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.

And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I

Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenXoBwxOAjKAIiQSiBner@ChacfcVUdwkUxRjIiPvMoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.