Dominique Laurent, human resources director of Schneider Electric France, takes the subject of the meeting very seriously. “A subject on which I break ground,” he said. Many people claim to be good at meeting management. In fact, no one really is. Let’s say instead that it is a continuous path of progress. » For this enthusiast of business transformation, there are two categories of managers: those who, “carried by the waves”, see bad meetings as inevitable because they do not know a better way to do things, and those who do part, who take the time to think about the subject and who take a certain number of actions.
The Point: Meetings are seen as too many and a source of frustration. How is this problem addressed at Schneider Electric France?
Dominique Laurent: Five years ago, we launched the One Energie program with an Anglo-Saxon training organization and people who had worked with British Olympic teams. The training aimed to teach executives to mentalize, as high-level athletes do, to perform better. As such, it had been decreed that a meeting should not exceed forty-five minutes. Since then, has this law been respected urbi et orbi in the company? The answer is no.
But managers, including myself, are quite draconian. Besides, as I speak to you, I just realized that I am invited to a meeting from 12 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. I will send an email to the organizer to remind him of the rule. Some people will tell you that not every issue can be resolved in forty-five minutes, and I completely agree. But we must hunt down meetings that are too long.
All businesses face meetings of twenty-five people. It’s not relevant. People can speak out but, in the end, only those with power make the decision. Others object that some are there to instruct the subject, others to decide, but twenty-five is far too many. For my part, I only participate in meetings – four to thirteen per day – only for which my presence is desirable and relevant, unless I need to learn more about a subject.
There were times when I wondered what I was doing in the meeting. At the start of inflation, for example, my financial director and I were invited to a meeting whose purpose was to increase the budgetary envelopes of our hotels. The decision was whether to spend the night from 130 to 132 euros. I sent an email saying that the subject was important, but that our presence was not necessary to resolve it. And we disconnected.
One thing I war against is the meeting before the meeting. In a meeting of ten people around sensitive subjects, different points of view confront and collide. The day before, people concerned with securing the perimeter come to see me to show me what they are going to present the next day. I tell them (and this has become famous), “No, no, no, we don’t do the meeting before the meeting. »
During world executive committees, once every three months, it’s the same. Project leaders try to socialize before meetings. They take you an hour to show you what they are going to present the following week. I say “no” again. This is a sign of a lack of psychological safety [the ability to share ideas, questions and concerns without fear of personal repercussions, editor’s note]. It’s difficult to fight.
The meeting is an interesting subject because it is a good vector for changing the company culture. It allows the manager to act effectively in the field of change. Its reform raises the question of the right to confront and challenge decisions, and this implies psychological security to do so.
Our vision: everyone challenges themselves. I am for a big debate. I want people who don’t think the same way, and in the end, if a decision has to be made, I’m the one who makes it. Great leaders don’t need to be present at every meeting. But to decide at each of the hierarchical levels, power must be given to the relevant level.
We have put in place a structured management system with regular meeting points and well-prepared agendas. I am very keen that the meeting begins with a perspective. We do very little reporting. History has shown us that this work is of little use. This reminds me of annual performance reviews. We blacken tons of paper that no one reads.
When it comes to project management, on the other hand, we produce reports and meeting minutes to monitor their progress. A meeting is successful if all the people legitimately contributing to the subject have the opportunity to express themselves and, at the end, a decision is made, a decision to investigate a file a little more, to change the direction , to request additional information, or even to make a decision.
