
Maybe you know that all is well with your team. People are satisfied that progress is good or better than good. You've had some bumps between some team members, but nothing serious. Or maybe you know of some kind of trouble, or that the team is blocked somehow from making further progress. Whatever you think you know, are you certain that everyone has a clear view — and the same clear view — of what's working and what isn't?
Check-ins can surface differences among team or group members about what's happening. A minute per person is probably enough. Check-ins won't catch everything, but they return a lot of value for the time expended.
The goal of check-ins is to gather contributions from everyone, to create a sound basis for moving forward, or to enable the team to later address whatever comes up. Here are five suggestions for conducting effective check-ins.
- Introduce check-ins when things are going well
- Introducing Check-ins won't catch everything,
but they return a lot of value
for the time expendedcheck-ins when people feel troubled about the team's progress can create difficulties for adopting the practice. When the team is pressed and facing obstacles, the check-in might feel to some like an unnecessary distraction from more urgent work. - Learning how to conduct check-ins does take some effort. When things are going well, the few minutes spent in checking in are not a cause for worry. Develop the practice in advance of trouble, not during trouble.
- Allow a random order of voluntary contributions
- Don't go "around the table" (or around the virtual table), requiring everyone to contribute something when called on. Let people choose when and whether to contribute. If someone wants to add something later, after already having contributed, that's fine too.
- A loose, relaxed contribution protocol welcomes all contributions, and no contribution is required.
- Create a parallel anonymous contribution channel
- In face-to-face meetings, collect unsigned, written contributions on slips of paper. Have abstainers submit blanks. For virtual meetings, use technology to create an anonymity channel.
- Anonymity enables some people to comment even when commenting feels unsafe, which helps the team surface truth about risky topics.
- Use both open and themed check-ins
- Vary the format. An open check-in enables people to comment on anything at all. A themed check-in welcomes all comments, but it especially encourages comments related to a theme or question.
- Both formats have strengths and weaknesses. An open format is unbiased, but might overlook an important issue. A themed format can focus on a known issue, but might give too little attention to issues not yet surfaced.
One last suggestion enhances psychological safety: ban comments about other people's contributions. A check-in is not a debate. A contribution is the contributor's view. The goal of the check-in is to express our views about the team's progress, and all of us are entitled to our own views. Top
Next Issue
Do you spend your 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
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.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.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
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:
Misleading Vividness
- Group decision making usually entails discussion. When contributions to that discussion include vivid
examples, illustrations, or stories, the group can be at risk of making a mistaken decision.
Why People Hijack Meetings
- When as chair of a meeting, you have difficulty completing a reasonable agenda, you might be the target
of a hijacking. Here's Part I of a series exploring meeting hijacking.
Asking Burning Questions
- When we suddenly realize that an important question needs answering, directly asking that question in
a meeting might not be an effective way to focus the attention of the group. There are risks. Fortunately,
there are also ways to manage those risks.
Self-Importance and Conversational Narcissism at Work: II
- Self-importance is one of four major themes of conversational narcissism. Knowing how to recognize the
patterns of conversational narcissism is a fundamental skill needed for controlling it. Here are eight
examples that emphasize self-importance.
Exhibitionism and Conversational Narcissism at Work: I
- Exhibitionism is one of four themes of conversational narcissism. Behavior considered exhibitionistic
in this context is that which is intended to call the attention of others to the abuser. Here are six
examples that emphasize exhibitionistic behavior.
See also Effective Meetings for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming July 16: Responding to Unwelcome Events
- Unwelcome events have two kinds of effects on decision-makers. One set of effects appears as we respond to events that have actually occurred. Another set manifests itself as we prepare for unwelcome events that haven't yet occurred, but which might occur. Making a wrong decision in either case can be costly. Available here and by RSS on July 16.
And on July 23: Microdelegation
- Microdelegation is a style of delegation in which the delegator unintentionally communicates the task to the subordinate in such detail and so repetitively that the subordinate is offended. As a result of this delegation style, many subordinates feel distrusted or suspected of fraud or goldbricking. Available here and by RSS on July 23.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.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, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
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 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed
