Better organisational decision making

It bothers me that last night, the plenum exhibited various qualities about meetings I just hated. Not to single out, I've been in other societies and worked in other companies where the "group" decision making is just as dysfunctional in my opinion.


The leader

Ideally there is some designated leader just listening and calling the shots. That's honestly my preference. See BDFL

My technological ideas for group decision making

As for synchronous meetings, they probably still need to happen. Email debates are rarely effective, especially if any participant has poor email etiquette or employs intentionally or not, some disruptive tactic.

For meetings, a very orderly, time limited "English parliamentary" style debate could be organised for big issues. At least two people, on each side of clearly defined topic with 3-5 minute speaking slots, which is broad casted or at least recorded.

Again, an online voting system would be used, but the voting window is short, i.e 10 minutes after the synchronous debate.

What are synchronous meetings good for?

Matters of discipline or some other urgency or crises is probably a good fit.

I doubt even summarising is a good use of everyone's time at a meeting. Summarising points is best done asynchronously, independently of bias and can be very tedious.

Nominal issues must be addressed and recorded by email, identified by URL.

A meeting must address some communication break down, which is fairly common by email or other recorded mediums like IRC.


If you like this, you might like the stateless Web kiosk software I develop. Webconverger typically replaces Windows on PCs and is deployed in public and business environments for ease of deployment and privacy. Once installed it auto-updates making it painless to maintain. Try it where you exclusively use the only viable open platform... the Web!