Anthropologist Edward Twitchell Hall, Jr. (1914-2009) developed fundamental concepts for describing how we experience space and time. [Hall 1920] He introduced the concepts of monochronic time and polychronic time, which are two different ways human cultures relate to time. People and groups with a monochronic orientation (M-People) are more comfortable undertaking only one task at a time, in a linear sequence. When M-People must tackle more than one task in an hour, they divide the hour into blocks, each dedicated to one task. When groups of M-People must work on multiple tasks at once, they divide into subgroups focused on one task at a time.
People and groups with a polychronic orientation (P-People) regard time more in terms of tasks than in terms of clocks or calendars. For example, on farms, time is defined by what's happening. Examples: it's time for planting, for harvest, for haying, for milking, or for breakfast. More than one thing can be happening at any given time.
In meetings of M-People, only one person has the floor at a time. M-People address their agenda items one by one. After they deal with an agenda item, they don't return. (Well, they do sometimes return, but they aren't comfortable when they do) A meeting of P-People might have several people talking at once, bouncing from topic to topic as the discussion requires. M-People are uncomfortable in P-style meetings; P-People are similarly uncomfortable in M-style meetings.
Most advice about effective meetings is M-style advice: have an agenda, schedule all items, avoid sidebars, and the like. But M-style meetings work well only when we understand the issues well, and we know where each discussion might lead. Unfortunately, the universe doesn't always work like that, especially in technical emergencies. Just as there's a place for monochronic meetings, there?s also a place for polychronic meetings. Here are some indicators of the need to adopt a polychronic orientation.
- Many people want to speak
- If many people want to speak, a single-threaded discussion is probably unworkable. Consider reconfiguring the meeting as a set of fluid caucuses, organized around the issues of interest, with people free to move from caucus to caucus as they wish or as they're needed. For face-to-face meetings, a single large room works best. For virtual meetings, you'll need additional virtual environments, one for each caucus. After 15 minutes or so, reconvene to determine if things have settled down.
- There's debate about agenda order
- When people disagree Polychronic meetings can be
daunting for people accustomed
only to monochronic meetingsabout the order of the items in the meeting, it's possible that there is agenda tangle: A depends on B depends on C depends on A, for example. If so, there is no correct order. Stop debating the order, and break into fluid caucuses, as above.
- Unexpected agenda tangles crop up repeatedly
- At times, people will be comfortable with a linear agenda, and the tangles and dependency loops among the agenda items won't become clear until discussion is underway. When dependencies have emerged, and the agenda begins to break down, abandon it. Reconfigure the meeting as fluid caucuses to explore those dependencies and to separate out any topics that can be addressed in a monochronic meeting first. When that work is pushed as far as possible, work on what's left in a polychronic format as above.
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 welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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.
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.
More articles on Effective Meetings:
- Dispersity Adversity
- Geographically and culturally dispersed project teams are increasingly common, as we become more travel-averse
and more bedazzled by communication technology. But people really do work better together face-to-face.
Here are some tips for managing dispersed teams.
- What, Why, and How
- When solving problems, groups frequently get stuck in circular debate. Positions harden even before
the issue is clear. Here's a framework for exploration that can sharpen thinking and focus the group.
- Naming Ideas
- Participants in group discussions sometimes reference each other's contributions using the contributor's
name. This risks offending the contributor or others who believe the idea is theirs. Naming ideas is
- Chronic Peer Interrupters: II
- People use a variety of tactics when they're interrupted while making contributions in meetings. Some
tactics work well, while others carry risks of their own. Here's Part II of a little survey of those tactics.
- Barriers to Accepting Truth: I
- In workplace debates, a widely used strategy involves informing the group of facts or truths of which
some participants seem to be unaware. Often, this strategy is ineffective for reasons unrelated to the
credibility of the person offering the information. Why does this happen?
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming February 8: Kerfuffles That Seem Like Something More
- Much of what we regard as political conflict is a series of squabbles commonly called kerfuffles. They captivate us while they're underway, but after a month or two they're forgotten. Why do they happen? Why do they persist? Available here and by RSS on February 8.
- And on February 15: Four Razors for Organizational Behavior
- Deviant organizational behavior can harm the people and the organization. In choosing responses, we consider what drives the perpetrators. Considering Malice, Incompetence, Ignorance, and Greed, we can devise four guidelines for making these choices. Available here and by RSS on February 15.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.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