Projects have Stakeholders, according to the founder of this column. Stakeholders may be on board with the project, ambivalent, or even detractors, but they are still stakeholders. We serve them and the project better when we ensure that we are keeping them informed, and addressing their need to not be surprised. One key technique to keep Stakeholders apprised of a project is through a Steering Committee meeting, probably scheduled about once per month.
It seems like there are many approaches for how to best organize and operate a Steering Committee. In the spirit of this column and community, we want to propose a “Bare Bones SteerCO, what you can’t not do. ” The problem is that Greg and Bob don’t see eye to eye on this yet–.
Greg Says
Let’s start with the belief that a SteerCO meeting is not the place for surprises, debates or design.
The purpose is to keep your stakeholders informed and involved, and as aligned as they can be towards solving the business improvement project at hand. It is an informational meeting only. Serious discussions deserve their own time and space, involving the appropriate stakeholders.
There is a corollary here—If we don’t want this meeting to devolve, we need to elevate our preparation, and make sure that we have informed all parties effectively. Make sure that everyone attending has necessary and relevant information and decisions/options well ahead of time, so that “Surprises” are avoided.
Bob Says
I’m not a big fan of informational meetings, Greg. I’m not even a small fan. Depending on what’s being steered, the group’s members are important people. Steering Committees/Councils are the final escalation point for resolving project issues, which means its members should have enough authority and political capital to resolve issues that reach them.
Greg Says
So, If steering committee meetings are for escalation of issues, does this mean:
– They are scheduled regularly, or only as needed to solve a problem?
Bob Says
I think we need to rewind. Before we can talk about how often a SteerCo should meet, or what its agenda should be, we need to talk about the process of chartering, staffing, and launching it.
That means determining such matters as: Purpose, vision, key messages; guiding principles; council roles and membership; SC staff support; and more (this is a conversation, not a PowerPoint!). And, for each of these, the SC, as it forms, should establish the cadence for each SC element. It’s those cadences that should determine the SC’s meeting schedule.
Greg Says
Then Is there is a gatekeeper (probably the project sponsor), who decides what the agenda is, and when to convene them?
Bob Says
Absolutely, although as a fine distinction these should be decided by the project sponsor wearing their SteerCO Chair hat and guided by a charter.
Greg Says
I hear your concerns about informational meetings– and to some degree, I agree. At best, I think they are a necessary evil.
Perhaps it is the PTSD from some poorly run Steering Committee meetings coming out, but I think problem solving meetings should be chartered separately, with the specific mission of solving a problem as the outcome of the time invested.
Bob Says
I think this aspect of things isn’t all that hard to solve. Just build “Status Update” and “Project Issues” into the overall agenda but don’t let them dominate it.
Greg Says
How about this? Could a compressed informational “SteerCO” meeting be delivered as a pre-recorded video from the PMs to the Council of the company? This would allow leaders to stay informed, but asynchronously, as they have time.
Bob Says.
Well, first of all you caused me to imagine the PM doing a tap dance while tap-dancing through any hard questions the SC might need to know about. Thanks a bunch!
But second … to be effective at steering whatever they’re steering, SC members will need to interact directly with the PM.
And third, I’m thinking that if the PM reports status via pre-recorded video, they’ll start thinking in terms of production value and not just substance.
That’s when it all falls apart, as the PM organizes the project team into a barbershop quartet, and other company PMs vie for winning the Best Project Status Video award. Back to you!
Greg Says
If we are going to get the time of these very valuable and busy people, I think we need to promise to make the most of their time. May I propose a Minimum Viable Agenda that I believe we can give our readers for the Bare Bones SteerCO?
o The project charter and goals. This is an important reminder—We need to remind ourselves why we are doing this project, and what benefits we are investing in.
o Any changes to roles or responsibilities in the team.
o A simple “green/amber/red” stoplight chart on budget, schedule and scope. This is what most people think a SteerCO meeting is, and this information should be conveyed as simply and visually as possible.
o Any comparison or chart about “Where we think we are” vs “Where we think we should be.” This is another case of simple and visual communication works wonders.
o Upcoming milestones, and who has responsibilities for some part of the accomplishment.
o Risks, issues, disagreements, and key decisions- Ideally, these are pre briefed, and use something like a decision paper format, so that the Council understands the issues, options, and different opinions before the meeting, and they are prepared for the discussion.
Bob Says
Yes to the MVA. My opinion is that your proposed one isn’t sufficiently Minimal.
The project charter should include cadences for such things as reviewing the project charter, vision, goals, and so on. So they’ll be in some SteerCO meetings and not others. My opinion is that each SC meeting should include:
- Project status
-
- Current: Green/yellow/red; explanation
- Look-ahead: Potential changes to schedule, scope, and budget
- Issues update:
-
- Status of past issues
- Impending issues
- Cadence-driven issues
- For each issue, support needed from the SC
- The buzz: What SC members are hearing from the rest of the company about the project.
That’s about all I have on the subject, unless I haul out my PowerPoint deck on the subject and apply Springer’s Law to it (Springer’s Law asks “Why use a picture when a thousand words will do”?).
So I’ll leave the last word to you.
Greg Says
I hope our readers will weigh in with some ideas about what they have found to be the most effective way to plan and manage this meeting. I feel like we have just scratched the surface of this topic.
Fantastic article!
Love the format.
I tend to come down on Bob’s side, though Greg made some good points.
But I think company culture plays an unavoidable role, specifically:
1. Does the company culture value synergy in decision making?
2. Does the company operate as a confederation of departments or as a union of mutually interdependent collection of functionally necessary departments?
A couple of variables you might want to consider.
I think I’m more Team Bob than Team Greg. Informational meetings are a great idea, but you always get some wise guy (often a corner-office wise guy) who raises his hand and says, “I have a question…” and then opens a discussion about the purpose of the project, its design and the implementation plan. Then the meeting degenerates into a series of “Well, if we’re going to revisit that, let’s revisit …”
The best you can do is allow time in the agenda to address this sort of question even though you can’t know what the question will be.
Best to put the Q&A at the end and hope the meeting runs long enough that the corner office person has to get someplace else 🙂
I take issue with information meetings.
Unless there is a critical need for a group to receive a piece of information at the same time (layoffs, bankruptcy, acquisition, CEO ran off with his soulmate…), information meetings just add to overloaded meeting schedules. And when those who get double-booked choose the other meting…do we just not inform them?
Be respectful of people’s time and attention. Create an “update” schedule. At some interval (maybe weekly), send out an update memo. One page (if detailed information is desired, put in in an appendix).
When there is a meeting (solve a problem or make a decision), people who take five minutes a week to read the memo will already be on-board with the agenda. And skip the video.
An aside: Most meetings are terrible. No agendas. A need to use the entire allotted time. No value proposition. Anyone reading this who conducts (or at some point might conduct) meetings, do you coworkers a favor and join Toastmasters. Toastmasters is known for public speaking. But they also run their meetings with precision.
Number one issue I always see is politics. It never seems that the SC has complete power to do something without another executive interfering or driving their own pet project outside of the SC. Regardless how well the meetings are setup, having people that can make final decisions is a big problem.
I tend to agree with Gregory (the commenter, not the columnist). In the days before email and other forms of mass communication information meetings were essential; now they’re by and large a waste of time. I’ve served on too many boards of directors of community groups (including Toastmasters — great recommendation!) that meet for the sake of meeting, not because there’s a need.