Authors

Picture the scene: a monthly place-based partnership leadership meeting online. There are 20 people on the call, but fewer than half of the people attending have their cameras on. There’s a packed agenda, each item has 5-15 minutes for discussion. People’s cameras might turn on, but then off again, as the items that are relevant to them come up. Decisions are made, but only 4 or 5 of the ‘usual suspects’ contribute to making those decisions. After the meeting, there are grumbles or complaints about the decisions that were made, and/or no action follows as a result.

Sound familiar?

This has been my experience of how the vast majority of meetings run, particularly in a system/partnership context. There is no judgement attached to this observation; the people I speak to who diligently attending these meetings are over-stretched, bouncing from meeting to meeting with no time to think, reflect or even go to the toilet in between! But I do often ask myself what the people with their cameras off are doing during these meetings. Are they listening attentively? Multi-tasking to complete other work? Are they even in the room at all? And what does this mean for decision making? How can we hold people to account for decisions that were made in meetings that they attended, but were only half listening to, if at all?

When working in any team environment, but particularly in a partnership context, consensus decision making is an essential tool to ensure genuine buy-in to an approach. It isn’t always the right or best decision-making model, but in a context where we are reliant on commitment rather than compliance, it is often needed. There are many definitions of consensus, but the way I describe it is a process in which everyone feels they have been heard, and where everyone agrees, or can live with, the decision made as a result. By this definition, consensus is impossible if more than half of the partners in the virtual room are silent.

So how do we move forward in this new world of online meetings? How do we ensure that the decisions that genuinely require consensus have the full participation of all partners? Here are a few tips to try!

  1. Have as many meetings as possible in person. This might be all of your key leadership meetings, or alternating in-person and online. By meeting face to face, you get better engagement in decision-making, and build the trust and rapport to make online meetings more effective.
  2. (Re)set expectations and ground rules. Taking the time to contract with each other about what it means to attend key meetings, the contributions expected, and an explicit request to keep cameras on might reduce the risk of distraction.
  3. Use technology. If there are key decisions where a wide range of views is important, using online tools such as menti or slido can encourage broader participation. Using these tools can give you a sense of how many people have participated, and can provide free-text as well as sliding scales/voting options.
  4. Encourage use of the chat. It’s important to acknowledge individual differences in how people feel comfortable to contribute to online meetings; actively encouraging people to share views in the chat might enable less vocal people to contribute.
  5. Free up agenda time. Allowing more time for more important discussions can reduce the anxiety people might feel about slowing down the discussion when it’s time to move on to the next item. Consider having separate mechanism for updates, and dedicating more agenda time to debate and discussion.
  6. Encourage disagreement. Remind people that being a ‘good partner’ doesn’t mean agreeing with each other. In fact, disagreement is an important and healthy part of partnership working as it leads to more robust decisions.
  7. Encourage naivety. Remind people that they don’t have to be an expert in a topic to have a view or ask questions, particularly in a partnership context. Sometimes the ‘naïve’ questions or reflections from someone from the acute on how community services are delivered can be exactly what’s needed to help bring a fresh perspective.
  8. Have a meeting bonfire! Review all of the meetings people are expected to attend and consider any that could be merged, adapted or eliminated to free up more time in people’s diaries. Individually, reflect on whether you need to attend all the meetings you are invited to, or if your team/service/organisation is already represented in any of them.

None of these actions alone will guarantee engagement and consensus, particularly if there are underlying challenges around trust or commitment. These things take time and a shared commitment to building a healthy leadership culture. But by starting to create better conditions for decision making, you are taking the first step to building a culture of accountability.