10. Let me know what the of the meeting is 12.A voted against introducing flexible working hours 13. No one voted against -the decision was 14. Mr Grey has that we take a break for coffee 15. There are a few more items to discuss 16. Thank you very much, everyone. I think that our meeting 17. But before we close the meeting: is there 11.4 Games people play at meetings Reading Games people play at meetings Do you ever feel as though you spend all your time in meetings? Henry Mintzberg, in his book The Nature of managerial Work, found that in large organizations managers spent 22 percent of their time at their desk, 6 percent on the telephone, 3 percent on other activities, but a whopping 69 percent in meetings There is a widely-held but mistaken belief that meetings are for solving problems"and making decisions. For a start, the number of people attending a meeting tends to be inversely proportional to their collective ability to reach conclusions and make decisions. And these are the least important elements Instead hours are devoted to side issues, playing elaborate games with one another. It seems therefore, that meetings serve some purpose other than just making decisions All meetings have one thing in common: role-playing. The most formal role is that of chairman. He(and it is usually a he) sets the agenda, and a good chairman will keep the meeting running on time and to the point. Sadly, the other, informal, role-players are often able to gain the upper hand. Chief is the"constant talker", who just loves to hear his or her own voice Then there are the"cant do"types who want to maintain the status quo. Since they have often been in the organization for a long time, they frequently quote historical experience as a ploy to block change: It won't work, e tried that in 1984 and it was a disaster. A more subtle version f the"cant do"type, the"yes, but. " has emerged recently. They have learnt about the need to sound positive, but they still can t bear to have things change. Another whole sub-set of characters are people who love meetings and want them to continue until 5.30 pm or beyond Irrelevant issues are their specialty. They need to call or attend meetings, either to avoid work, or to justify their lack of performance, or simply because they do not have enough to do Then there are the"counter-dependents'", those who usually disagree with everything that is said, particularly if it comes from the chairman or through consensus from the group. These people need to fight authority in whatever form10. Let me know what the __________ of the meeting is. 11. I have a __________ to make. 12. A __________ voted against introducing flexible working hours. 13. No one voted against-the decision was__________. 14. Mr. Grey has __________ that we take a break for coffee. 15. There are a few more __________ items to discuss. 16. Thank you very much, everyone. I think that __________ our meeting. 17. But before we close the meeting: is there __________? 11.4 Games people play at meetings Reading Games people play at meetings Do you ever feel as though you spend all your time in meetings? Henry Mintzberg, in his book The Nature of Managerial Work, found that in large organizations managers spent 22 percent of their time at their desk, 6 percent on the telephone, 3 percent on other activities, but a whopping 69 percent in meetings. There is a widely-held but mistaken belief that meetings are for “solving problems” and “making decisions”. For a start, the number of people attending a meeting tends to be inversely proportional to their collective ability to reach conclusions and make decisions. And these are the least important elements. Instead hours are devoted to side issues, playing elaborate games with one another. It seems, therefore, that meetings serve some purpose other than just making decisions. All meetings have one thing in common: role-playing. The most formal role is that of chairman. He (and it is usually a he) sets the agenda, and a good chairman will keep the meeting running on time and to the point. Sadly, the other, informal, role-players are often able to gain the upper hand. Chief is the “constant talker”, who just loves to hear his or her own voice. Then there are the “can’t do” types who want to maintain the status quo. Since they have often been in the organization for a long time, they frequently quote historical experience as a ploy to block change: “It won’t work, e tried that in 1984 and it was a disaster.” A more subtle version f the “can’t do” type, the “yes, but…”, has emerged recently. They have learnt about the need to sound positive, but they still can’t bear to have things change. Another whole sub-set of characters are people who love meetings and want them to continue until 5.30 pm or beyond Irrelevant issues are their specialty. They need to call or attend meetings, either to avoid work, or to justify their lack of performance, or simply because they do not have enough to do. Then there are the “counter-dependents”, those who usually disagree with everything that is said, particularly if it comes from the chairman or through consensus from the group. These people need to fight authority in whatever form