How to get results without forcing a meeting

I remember the last time I encountered a F.O.R.C.E. (Feedback-Oversight-Reality-Closure-Engagement) meeting. I spent weeks trying to get my team to engage with a proposal I had written. After multiple attempts to share it asynchronously, I found myself scheduling a meeting just to ensure that everyone would at least look at it. This got me thinking about the nature of these meetings and whether there were better alternatives.

F.O.R.C.E. meetings attempt to force one of the following outcomes:

• Feedback & Engagement - Force people to interact with content or provide feedback
• Oversight & Accountability - Force individuals to take responsibility for tasks or projects
• Reality & Visibility - Force people to see and acknowledge information
• Closure & Decisions - Force decisions or actions to be taken
• Engagement & Connection - Force social interaction and team bonding

Meetings can certainly force those things, but they aren't the only solution. They become a problem when they're viewed as the only way to get things done. It's important to balance these meetings with more asynchronous approaches to avoid meeting fatigue.

If a team relies heavily on these meetings, it may signal problems such as poor communication, lack of clarity, or insufficient accountability mechanisms. Addressing these root causes can reduce the need for F.O.R.C.E. meetings and lead to more effective collaboration. Below are some strategies to reduce reliance on F.O.R.C.E. meetings.

Feedback & Engagement meeting alternatives

Let's start with the "obligatory opinion hour" meetings. A document is shared. Nobody responds. You could move forward, assuming silence means consent. "Surely if someone had an issue, they would have raised it by now?" you'd think to yourself.

As a person who has birthed that very thought, let me tell you, it's a dangerous assumption. Even when I've scheduled "obligatory opinion hour" meetings, I've had colleagues erupt their opinions into the heavens a week or two later, causing catastrophic delays to project scope and timelines. If a meeting can't prevent that, clearly, there are other factors at play. Meetings often hide deeper organizational issues that need to be addressed.

If the goal is to get feedback or engagement on a proposal, review, or brainstorming session, consider the following alternatives:

• Set clear deadlines for feedback. Specify a date and time by which team members should provide their input, creating a sense of urgency without a meeting. If objections are not raised by that time, the proposal can move forward. 11th-hour objections should be discouraged unless they bring new, serious issues to light.
• Use collaborative documents. Platforms like Google Docs or Notion allow team members to comment and suggest edits asynchronously.
• Implement "Proposal Days." Designate specific days when team members are expected to review and provide feedback on proposals.
• Foster a writing-first culture. Encourage team members to prioritize written communication for sharing ideas and feedback, reserving meetings for more complex discussions.

If writing does not sufficiently communicate the nuance of a proposal, consider recording a short video walkthrough using tools like Loom. This allows the proposal author to explain key points and context, making it easier for reviewers to understand and provide feedback asynchronously.

Oversight & Accountability meeting alternatives

These are the "did you do your homework?" meetings, also known as progress check-ins or recurring accountability meetings. Under the surface are a whole host of dysfunctional organizational issues. Let's make explicit some of the common implicit beliefs motivating this type of meeting: employees won't do their work unless closely monitored, employees need to be micromanaged and reminded to stay on task, and employees can't be trusted to manage their own time and priorities.

There are other ways to ensure that projects move forward and tasks are completed.

• Link proposals to project management tools. Automatically create tasks in tools like Linear or Jira when proposals are approved, ensuring accountability without meetings.
• Encourage regular written updates. Team members can provide written progress updates on their tasks, which can be reviewed asynchronously. Writing was designed for this one-way transmission of information.
• Pair team members to check in on each other's progress, fostering accountability without formal meetings.

Reality & Visibility meeting alternatives

Otherwise known as "Could have been an email" meetings, these are the easiest to replace with asynchronous tools. If you've ever attended a meeting that felt like a long lecture on company updates or project statuses, you know what I'm talking about. Oftentimes, attendance is mandatory even though the meeting would have unfolded in the same way if no one had shown up. Those are all clues that the meeting might not be necessary.

Automated digests, update feeds, and summary bots can ensure that team members stay informed without the need for meetings.

If you already have systems in place, but these meetings continue to persist, make sure that the content is valuable and the quantity is manageable. It is easy to overload people with information that they don't need or care about. Consider segmenting updates based on relevance to different teams or individuals to reduce noise.

For those who like the human touch, try asynchronous video updates. Tools like Loom allow leaders to record short video messages that can be watched at the recipient's convenience, providing a personal touch without scheduling a meeting. These can be coupled with much shorter meetings for Q&A or discussion if needed. The questions could be filtered to only those that are not explicitly answered in the video.

Closure & Decisions meeting alternatives

Now we have the "handshake or hostage" meetings," where the goal is to force closure on something. The attendees are held hostage until a decision is made. These meetings often arise from a lack of clarity around decision-making authority or processes within the team or organization.

To move decision-making out of meetings and make it asynchronous, a team should first adopt an explicit decision-making framework like DACI, RACI, or the Consensus spectrum to clarify roles and process. Second, every proposal should clearly identify the single approver (DRI), and the decision recorded when that person signs off with a comment or emoji in the channel. Finally, the team should leverage a "default to action" rule: the proposal proceeds if there are no objections by a specified date (X date), a process that can be easily systematized using tools designed for asynchronous review.

Engagement & Connection meeting alternatives

While "mandatory merriment" meetings are one way to foster human connection on a team, they aren't the only way. These meetings can also be replaced with asynchronous social interactions.

If the goal is team bonding, consider virtual social platforms like Donut or Gather, which facilitate casual interactions and team-building activities asynchronously. You can also create dedicated Slack channels for non-work-related discussions to encourage informal interactions among team members. Don't underestimate the emotional resonance of the human voice or video, even when consumed asynchronously through voice notes or video messages.

Ways leaders can help reduce F.O.R.C.E. meetings

Leaders can play a crucial role in reducing the reliance on meetings by promoting and modeling asynchronous communication practices. Here are some strategies they can employ:

• Model asynchronous behavior. Leaders should lead by example, using asynchronous communication methods and minimizing their own reliance on meetings.
• Set clear expectations. Define when meetings are necessary and when asynchronous methods should be used, helping teams make informed decisions about communication.
• Provide training and resources. Offer workshops or resources on effective asynchronous communication and collaboration techniques.
• Recognize and reward asynchronous contributions. Acknowledge team members who effectively use asynchronous methods to contribute to projects and discussions.

Closing thoughts

The goal of the post is not to eliminate meetings entirely but to critically evaluate their necessity and effectiveness. Every meeting has a cost, and we should carefully consider if that cost is justified by the value it provides. By adding more asynchronous alternatives to our communication toolkit, we can create more efficient and effective ways of working together.