如何讓會議更高效
就像普羅米修斯每天等待上帝派遣的鷹來啄食自己的肝臟一樣，大多數(shù)員工對于一個兩小時的會議也抱有同樣觀感。對于還有工作尚未完成的員工，會議已經(jīng)成為一種折磨。
會議的低效是永恒的問題。1957年，管理學學者和著名作家C.Northcote Parkinson提出“瑣碎定律”：“投入在某項會議議程上的時間與其涉及的金額成反比”。本著同樣的精神，本專欄提出一個更廣泛的原則，應(yīng)用于十人及以上會議，姑且不謙虛的稱其為“巴特利定律”：“會議中80%的人80%的時間都被浪費了”。
注：管理學上，帕金森發(fā)現(xiàn)一種稱為瑣碎定律的現(xiàn)象。在討論非常專業(yè)而且金額龐大的事情時，一般人由于缺乏專業(yè)知識，不敢隨便發(fā)言，以免失言，貽笑大方，因此多半會肯定（或逃避）該重大方案，而提些與主題無關(guān)的雞毛蒜皮小事。相對的，對于簡單的瑣碎小事，由于平常大家都會接觸到而且有相當認識，反而意見特別多，帕金森稱此現(xiàn)象為瑣碎定律。上述情況會造成，一個組織花費大量時間討論沒什么意義的瑣事，事情的重要性與組織投入的時間精力成反比。
這條定律可得出多種推論。至少80%的會議做出的決定與會議中最高薪者意見一致。簡言之，那些持有不同意見的人其實是在白費口舌。也許因為知道這是無用功，一個大型會議中，不到一半的參會者會發(fā)言，至少一半?yún)邥谀硞€時間查看手機。
這個問題部分源于一個悖論，雖然工作者討厭參加會議，但他們更討厭被排除在外。沒有什么比一個沒有邀請你參加的部門會議更讓人起疑的了。為了避免這種擔心，管理者傾向于盡可能多的邀請可能感興趣的人參會。
當有重要事情發(fā)生，比如領(lǐng)導層或戰(zhàn)略調(diào)整，或者宣布裁員等，顯然應(yīng)該全體參會。如果將員工分成小組，在小型晨會上，除了工作進展還有更多內(nèi)容可以交流，整個過程可能需要15分鐘時間。
但是大多數(shù)會議拖延更長時間。賓夕法尼亞大學沃頓商學院管理學教授Maurice Schweitzer說，準備工作充分時，會議效果最好。如提前將會議議程通知參會者，防止猝不及防——臨時通知經(jīng)常導致負面反應(yīng)?？上蕚涔ぷ髟诠芾碇锌刹皇鞘裁从腥さ氖?，因此準備充分的情況很少，他補充道。
一個前提是，確定會議的目的是說服員工支持一項管理決定，還是了解員工的看法和問題。如果是前者，那么無論誰組織會議，持贊同觀點的人應(yīng)該先發(fā)言并推動會議議程。但是在一個運轉(zhuǎn)良好的企業(yè)，這樣的會議應(yīng)該為數(shù)不多。
如果會議的目的是了解員工的想法，那就需要一種新方法。Maurice Schweitzer認為，應(yīng)該鼓勵職位較低的員工發(fā)言，并遵循“不打斷原則”以免嚇到他們。另一種方式是讓員工提前匿名提交意見。
“不打斷原則”的風險在于，話多的同事可能會使會議十分冗長，在這種情況下，每個員工都會對喋喋不休討論與議程無關(guān)問題的人和無法區(qū)分個人軼事和科學證據(jù)的人失去耐心。因此本專欄建議將插話的時間控制在2-3分鐘以內(nèi)。
避免帕金森“瑣碎定律”最好的方法就是合理安排議程。德勤咨詢的Jay Bevington認為，人們傾向于將最重要——同時也是最容易引起爭論的議程留到會議最后。但是這樣的問題應(yīng)該最先解決。
此外，除非會后所有參會者都知道會議決定，否則召開會議就沒有意義。Jay Bevington說，很多人會驚訝的發(fā)現(xiàn)，許多董事會后并不清楚會議上的決定。
不過，對于乏味的會議，最好的解決辦法是少開。通用電氣的新老板John Flannery呼吁“盡可能少開或不開會”。得益于現(xiàn)代技術(shù)奇跡，即時通訊群讓管理者和員工保持聯(lián)系。信息以簡便的方式傳遞，與之無關(guān)的員工可以忽略這些信息，繼續(xù)工作。今后管理者想要召集會議時，他們必須很好的回答這個問題：這個會議真的有必要開嗎？
原文拾粹：
Taking minutes, wasting hours
1、經(jīng)濟學人的文章標題經(jīng)常使用巧妙的俗語或雙關(guān)，此處使用排比句式，Taking minutes在這里應(yīng)為做會議記錄，借此指代開會
How to make meetings work better
MOST workers view the prospect of a two-hour meeting with the same enthusiasm as Prometheus awaited the daily arrival of the eagle, sent by the gods to peck at his liver. Meetings have been a form of torture for office staff for as long as they have pushed pencils and bashed keyboards.
One eternal problem has been their inefficiency. In 1957, C.Northcote Parkinson, an academic and legendary writer on management, came up with the law of triviality, that “the time spent on any item of the agenda will be in inverse proportion to the sum [of money] involved.” In that same spirit, this columnist would like to propose an even broader principle, applying to gatherings of ten people or more, and immodestly called Bartleby’s Law: “80% of the time of 80% of the people in meetings is wasted.”
2、in inverse proportion to，成反比，Time spent on a proposal varies in inverse proportion to its importance.在一項建議上所花的時間往往同它的重要性成反比
3、In that same spirit，本著同樣的精神
Various corollaries to this law follow. After at least 80% of meetings, any decisions taken will be in line with the HIPPO, or “highest-paid person’s opinion”. In short, those who backed a different outcome will have wasted their breath. Perhaps because they are aware of the futility of their input, fewer than half of the people in a large meeting will bother to speak and at least half of the attendees will at some point check their phones.
4、corollary，推論
5、wasted one's breath，某人白費唇舌
6、futility，徒勞
Part of the problem lies in the paradox that, although workers hate attending meetings, they loathe being excluded even more. Nothing is so likely to induce paranoia than a department meeting to which you are not invited. To avoid this fear, managers are tempted to invite as many people as might be interested.
7、paradox，悖論
8、induce paranoia，引發(fā)猜疑
Clearly there are occasions when everyone should be involved: when a significant event occurs such as a change of leadership or strategy, or the announcement of job losses. If workers are organised?into small teams, there is much to be said for the “morning huddle” in which members update each other on their progress; the whole thing can take 15 minutes.
9、morning huddle，晨間會議
But most meetings drag on for much longer. Maurice Schweitzer, professor of management at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, says they work best when preparation is done. Informing people of the agenda in advance keeps them from being caught off guard—surprise often leads to a negative reaction to plans. Sadly, he adds, preparation is not a sexy part of management so seldom gets done.
10、?drag on，拖延，延長
11、being caught off guard，猝不及防
One prerequisite is to establish if the meeting is designed to persuade the staff to go along with a management decision or to learn about the workers’ ideas and problems. If the former, then allies of whoever is in the chair should speak first, and drive the agenda. But such meetings ought to be rare in a well-run firm.
12、prerequisite，先決條件
13、drive the agenda，推動會議議程
If a meeting’s object is to learn what people think, a new approach is required. Low-status employees should be encouraged to speak, says Mr Schweitzer, and there should be a “no interruption rule” so?they cannot be intimidated. Another option would be to let people submit views anonymously in advance.
The danger of a “no interruption” rule is that garrulous colleagues might make such meetings extremely lengthy. At one point, every worker will have lost patience with “Tommy Tangents” (those who drone on at length about an issue that is irrelevant to the agenda) and “Hearsay Harrys” (those who cannot tell the difference between a personal anecdote and scientific evidence). So Bartleby would favour limiting all interventions to a maximum of 2-3minutes.
14、garrulous，話多的
15、?drone on at length，喋喋不休，長篇大論
The best way to avoid Parkinson’s law of triviality is to get the agenda right. Jay Bevington of Deloitte, a consultancy, says there is a temptation to leave the most important—and therefore the most contentious—items until the end of the meeting. Instead they should be tackled at the start.
16、contentious，有爭議的
Furthermore, there is no point in holding a meeting unless everyone knows what has been decided afterwards. Mr Bevington says that many would be surprised how many board directors leave a meeting without being sure of what has been agreed upon.
But perhaps the best solution to tedious gatherings is to have far fewer of them. GE’s new boss, John Flannery, has called for “l(fā)ittle or no meetings where possible”. Thanks to the miracle of modern technology, messaging groups allow management and employees to keep in touch. Information can be imparted in succinct form and those who are not involved can ignore the messages and get on with their work. Next time a manager is tempted to call colleagues together, they must have a good answer to the question: “Is this meeting absolutely necessary?”
17、succinct，簡潔的
譯者注：本文選自《經(jīng)濟學人》（2018年6月30日）
