Will my boss get offended if I suggest less frequent meetings?

[Eternal Sunshine]

Since I started work we have been meeting once every 2 weeks. I often find that there is not that much to talk about. Everything is going well and there are generally no issues. We end up gossiping and I leave 30 mins later. I don't see much point in those meetings and most of the other staff doesn't have them. When I started he was more like "what do you want?" in terms of frequency. So 2 weeks was set by me.

 

Maybe he is thinking the same thing but doesn't want to say it? My suggestion would be not to have meetings unless there is a problem..

 

Thoughts?

[GemmaUK]

No, I think he will be fine with it.

 

We have meetings about every two or three months and there will be a change in procedure or a problem to focus on. After that other things may come up and get resolved too.

To be fair though about half of the team are good communicators, so often a problem won't come up until it impacts upon one of the good communicators.

The not so good communicators don't and won't highlight issues even given an opportunity such as a meeting. However, on odd occasions they will mention a problem in passing during work time and often that can be the only way to pick up on an issue.

 

More than meetings I have found that listening while working is the best way to know if there are any issues.

[thefooloftheyear]

Depends on your status/tenure as an employee there...If you are new and/or not at higher management level, then I could easily understand that they might not look favorably on it, even if you are bringing up a valid point..They may see you as a pot stirrer or??

 

TFY

[Taramere]

I wouldn't do it. It's for the boss to take the initiative, really, whether the meetings should be disbanded. It's probably part of his own job spec to tick a "staff supervision every two weeks" box. If you say that there doesn't seem to be much point to the meetings then you might inadvertently be criticising him for failing to carry out one of his duties.

 

If I were you, I'd try to find out (without him knowing obviously - maybe via a company manual accessible to all staff) what his duties with regard to these meetings are. Then you can maybe raise a couple of minor things that won't put you or anybody else in a bad light, but that will provide him with some sort of evidence of productive supervision taking place.

[ja123]

As already said, I'd let him take the initiative. You never know, he might see the "meetings" as touching base with staff for unity/morale sake.

[GemmaUK]

The two weeks was set by you though wasn't it EternalSunshine?

 

So it would just be a case that you have realised less meetings are needed than you originally thought.

 

I don't see an issue with that in terms of upsetting him. It certainly wouldn't bother me if I were your boss.

[Eternal Sunshine]

The two weeks was set by you though wasn't it EternalSunshine?

 

So it would just be a case that you have realised less meetings are needed than you originally thought.

 

I don't see an issue with that in terms of upsetting him. It certainly wouldn't bother me if I were your boss.

 

Yeah they were set by me. When I started (5 months ago) he asked me if I wanted regular meetings and I said "sounds like a good idea". Then he said how often? So I came up with "once in fortnight". Then he set one of those automatic recurring appointments and here we are.

[bathtub-row]

I meet with everyone on my team, individually, each week. Then we have a team meeting once a week. There is always something to talk about, especially in the individual meetings. If we consistently had nothing to talk about in those meetings, I would re-evaluate them.

 

My concern is, why does your boss have these meetings with you and no one else? Does your position fall into a different category than everyone else's? Is he doing this because you're new? He should be careful about how that could be interpreted, and so should you. If I were you, instead of going in those meetings with nothing to talk about, keep notes on the things you did over the past two weeks and give him a recap of them. Or, if you have a list of your job duties, give him a run-down of each one. Surely, you did enough things in a two-week period that are worth mentioning.

[GemmaUK]

Yeah they were set by me. When I started (5 months ago) he asked me if I wanted regular meetings and I said "sounds like a good idea". Then he said how often? So I came up with "once in fortnight". Then he set one of those automatic recurring appointments and here we are.

 

In that case I don't see a problem with spacing them out more.

 

If no one has anything to talk about or resolve and they just gossip it's a waste of everyone's time.

I can understand why to set up meetings but also sometimes you can find they're not needed on a regular basis.

[MsSmurf]

Yeah they were set by me. When I started (5 months ago) he asked me if I wanted regular meetings and I said "sounds like a good idea". Then he said how often? So I came up with "once in fortnight". Then he set one of those automatic recurring appointments and here we are.

 

Well now that you've been there awhile and clearly have a firm grasp of your job I think its ok if you suggest meeting less often. Don't make it sound like you don't want to meet with your boss though. Maybe indicate you know he's busy and has other things he could do and that you feel solid enough in your position to have less frequent check ins if he agreeable. If he asks you to suggest a new frequency I'd go with quarterly. If something urgent comes up obviously you'll have a meeting sooner, but otherwise the time wasting gossip fests will be less often.