Chapter 12
How to Evaluate and Improve a Meeting
Evaluating Meetings
To improve future meetings, leaders need some evaluation of the effectiveness of the meetings they conduct. There are three possible sources for the evaluation of a meeting:
1. self-evaluation by the leader
2. evaluation by a trained observer
3. evaluation by participants.
All of these sources can be helpful. The worth of the evaluation will depend on the objectivity of the evaluator as well as the effectiveness of the forms and procedures that are used. Let's consider each approach separately.
Self-Evaluation by the Leader
After the meeting is over, the leader can ask, “How did I do?” To answer the question, the leader needs guidelines or standards to use. Also, the leader must be careful to be objective and look at the meeting as an outsider would.
Table 12-1 was developed to be used in a leader's self-evaluation of a meeting. It considers the satisfaction of the participants as well as the accomplishment of objectives in minimum time.
The completion of table 12-1 will take concentration and objectivity. If it is completed and analyzed as soon as every meeting is over, great improvements could be made in future meetings by the leader.
Table 12-1. Self-Evaluation of a Meeting.
Evaluation by a Trained Observer
A trained observer is one who knows the ingredients of a productive meeting. This person would sit in the back of the room and objectively observe during the meeting. A form would be helpful to guide the evaluation.
If the person is making a presentation, a relatively simple form (table 12-2) can be completed by the observer and discussed with the speaker.
A more sophisticated approach is needed if the meeting consists of more than a simple presentation. Tables 12-3 and 12-4 were developed for completion during and after the meeting. In addition, the observer should have a pad of paper to record comments and suggestions as the meeting progresses. The notes can be coded to the form (for example, A3 on table 12-3 would be a comment concerning noise).
Table 12-4, to be completed by the trained observer after the program, is identical to sections A, B, and C of table 12-1 to be completed by the leader. If both people complete these forms independently, it will provide an excellent opportunity to compare notes and reach agreement on what can be done to improve future meetings.
Some leaders may not appreciate frank and critical comments from a trained observer. Therefore, a word of advice is needed for both the leader and the trained observer:
Advice for meeting leader: Be receptive to the comments of the trained observer. Don't be defensive. Recognize that the trained observer has one purpose: to help you improve future meetings.
Table 12-2. Evaluation by a Trained Observer.
Table 12-3. Detailed Evaluation of Meeting Productivity by a Trained Observer.
(To be completed during the meeting)
Table 12-4. Evaluation of Meeting Productivity by a Trained Observer.
(To be completed immediately after the meeting)
Advice for trained observer: Be tactful as well as objective. Compliment as well as criticize. Remember, most people don't like to be criticized, even if you are trying to help. Think of yourself as a salesperson with ideas to help your customer (the leader). If he or she doesn't buy what you have to say, your time has been wasted and perhaps your relationship has worsened. Your objective is to help, not criticize, so act accordingly.
Evaluation by Participants
Participants provide a good source for evaluation. Like the leader, they may not be able to be as objective as a trained observer. But they can provide valuable feedback to help the leader improve meeting effectiveness. The type of meeting would determine the specific forms to use. But there are five guidelines to get honest and meaningful reactions to all types of meetings:
1. Determine what kind of information you want (subject, leader, facilities, schedule, handouts, visual aids, etc.).
2. Prepare a written form to get reaction from participants.
3. Design the form so the information can be tabulated and quantified. Do not use open questions like, “How well did you like the program?” or “What did you like best?” These questions take much longer to answer and are less meaningful.
4. Allow participants to add comments that will help explain their reactions and offer suggestions for improvement. A good question is, “What would have made the meeting more effective?” or “How could the meeting have been improved?”
5. Obtain honest reactions by removing any fear of repercussions for negative comments. The best way to do this is to make the forms anonymous and have participants put them on a table on their way out of the meeting.
As examples, let's consider an instructional meeting and then a staff meeting to illustrate the kinds of forms and procedures that should be followed to get honest and helpful reactions.
EXAMPLE: EVALUATING AN INSTRUCTIONAL MEETING
Why Ask for Participant Reactions?
The purpose of instructional meetings is to help the participants improve their behavior and the results they accomplish. If instructors are trying to help them, their reactions will tell to what extent they are helped as they see it. This feedback to the leader is very important for several reasons:
The process of asking for their reactions tells the participants that the instructor is learner-oriented. And the leader should consider them customers and recognize the importance of getting positive reactions.
The reactions indicate the level of satisfaction of the participants—one of the three ingredients of a productive meeting. These are the reactions the trainees will carry back to the job. These feelings can affect their entire attitude—toward the job, toward the organization, and toward the training itself. If the reactions are negative, the entire training program can receive a black eye and even be eliminated if the news gets to high-level executives.
The reactions could be closely related to the learning that takes place. Positive reactions indicate a high level of interest and a good climate for learning to take place. Negative reactions indicate such things as lack of interest, disappointment, desire to be elsewhere, and lack of respect for the conference leader or speaker. These attitudes are not conducive toward learning.
Specific comments can suggest areas of meeting improvement that the leader or the trained observer did not see. These can be very helpful in improving future meetings.
When Should You Ask for Participant Reaction?
It is important to get reactions from all participants immediately after the program is over. Ask the participants to complete their forms and turn them in before leaving the room. This way the leader can get 100 percent response without being able to identify the reactions from any person. If a leader allows the reaction to be delayed, the leader is almost sure to get less than 100 percent response and sometimes as low as 20 percent.
Delayed response may rate the meeting as being better, worse, or the same as an immediate response. If the leader wants delayed response also, that's fine. But be sure to get immediate response and feedback because that is what they will take back to their jobs. A comparison of immediate with delayed responses may be helpful in evaluating the meeting and deciding on improvements.
How to Obtain Honest Participants' Reactions
A form should be designed and used to incorporate the five important guidelines described previously:
1. Determine the information you want.
2. Use a written form.
3. Design the form so it can be tabulated and quantified.
4. Encourage written comments and suggestions.
5. Obtain honest reactions by making it anonymous.
At the Management Institute, University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, two forms are used. Table 12-5 is used to evaluate each leader who conducts an instructional meeting. It obtains reactions to the subject, leader, facilities, and meals. It is designed so the forms can be tabulated and quantified. It does not require or even suggest a signature. It encourages comments and suggestions for improvement. It is completed by each participant and put in a pile as the participant leaves the room. It does obtain honest and meaningful reactions from the participants concerning their satisfaction with the entire meeting and various phases of it.
Table 12-5. Reaction Sheet.
Where several leaders appear on the same program, a final comment sheet is also used as shown in table 12-6. This provides an overall reaction, which can be quantified and analyzed for improving future programs. The example of the evaluation of an instructional meeting (table 12-5) illustrates a number of principles for obtaining participants' reactions to a meeting. First of all, it tells the participants that the leader wants to conduct productive meetings and wants their help in doing it. This process can have a positive effect on the participants.
Also, it provides the leader with accurate information on the level of satisfaction of the participants, which is one of the three ingredients of a productive meeting. The leader and the trained observer can never be quite sure of the level of satisfaction of participants, particularly if the leader is a manager of the participants. The participants can leave the meeting with apparent enthusiasm and satisfaction, but their mood changes when they get out the sight of the leader. They may even tell the leader that it was a fine meeting because they want to impress him or her, but they might tell their peers that it was a waste of time.
The benefits of participant reaction to the leader can be great if five conditions exist:
1. The leader really wants to improve future meetings.
2. The leader sincerely wants honest reactions from participants.
3. The participants aren't afraid to give honest reactions and suggestions.
4. The leader reacts positively to the feedback, whether positive or negative.
5. The leader incorporates some of the comments and suggestions into future meetings.
EXAMPLE: EVALUATING A STAFF MEETING
If the leader is evaluating a staff or departmental meeting, table 12-7 can be used or adapted to the situation.
It is obvious that the completion of table 12-7 is going to take quite a bit of time. It is important to allow the 15 to 20 minutes that will be required. It's also pretty obvious that this form should not be used at the end of every staff or departmental meeting. The best approach would be to explain it and distribute it at the end of a particular staff meeting. The reactions should then be tabulated and summarized. The leader should study them and incorporate whatever suggestions will help improve future staff meetings. At a later time (perhaps six to 10 staff meetings later), the same procedure and form can be used to see whether improvements have been made as the participants see it. Participants who complete a form like table 12-7 will be watching closely to see if the meeting leader makes any changes.
Improving Future Meetings
Three separate but related approaches have been suggested for evaluating meetings. The first calls for a self-evaluation by the meeting leader immediately after the meeting. The second uses a trained observer who evaluates the meeting while in progress and supplements it with an evaluation immediately after the meeting ends. The third approach elicits reactions from the participants. Examples have been given for both an instructional and staff meeting.
Table 12-6. Final Comment Sheet for Participants.
Which approach is best? The more the better. Each of the three can provide helpful information. The use of two of the three procedures will provide information from two sources to reinforce or challenge the evaluation of each. The use of all three will provide the most helpful data.
Table 12-7. Evaluation of a Departmental Meeting.
As a starter, each meeting leader should at least use the self-evaluation approach. If a trained observer is available, this should be done on a selected basis. The meeting leader should be sure that the trained observer doesn't interfere with the effectiveness of the meeting just by being there. The leader may want to introduce the trained observer and explain the purpose.
Regarding the evaluation by participants, reaction sheets should be used immediately in all instructional meetings. Tables 12-5 and 12-6 can be used or adapted to get honest and meaningful reactions. These reactions and comments should be carefully analyzed by the meeting instructors and coordinators, and meeting changes should be made accordingly.
Regarding the evaluation of staff or departmental meetings by the participants, proceed with caution. A leader shouldn't do it if he or she doesn't want honest reactions and if the leader doesn't plan to incorporate changes. A leader must be willing to swallow some pride and accept critical reactions from subordinates. Some leaders may not be able to do this. They will probably go on conducting their meetings the same way, whether productive or nonproductive. But those leaders who are willing to accept criticism and suggestions from subordinates in their staff meetings can be richly rewarded with more productive meetings to the benefit of all.
Regarding meetings, practice improves performance under two conditions:
1. You practice the right things.
2. You are being critiqued, coached, and helped to improve.
Obviously, the first condition requires a person to know the ingredients of a productive meeting. The second condition requires critical analysis of meetings to suggest ways to improve. This section of the book has described three ways to evaluate, analyze the information, and look for ways to improve. You must provide the desire. As the old saying goes, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink!”