I’ve worked with people who will sometimes interrupt the natural pre-meeting banter to force an icebreaker. Like, what the hell do you think we were just doing you corporate ass-hat?
Frankly, I’m deeply suspicious of anyone who forces a “round robin” of any kind during any meeting. It very rarely has any value and tells me that that person shouldn’t be running the meeting, or that that particular meeting didn’t need to happen.
As another poster said, sometimes it’s useful and sometimes it’s a waste of time.
I frequently encounter meetings with outside entities for a bunch of stuff related to various large projects/initiatives and the outside entity will bring anywhere from 3-8 random people I’ve never heard of, and in turn we bring a similar number of people they haven’t met or interacted with directly (a good example is a logistics director or facilities manager for a building).
Introductions to go around the room in the format “hello, I’m ________ and I’m the ________, I do the __________ for _________” are good to just be like “oh ok you’re the ______ person, got it”
Going around the room and asking everyone to say where they’re from and their favorite food and least favorite movie, ALWAYS a waste of time unless you’re a grade schooler.
Edit: ignore the italics, not sure why they’re there and I don’t really care to figure it out
Yeah, in meetings with outside teams I can usually understand it and it’s tolerable. But honestly I prefer if the person running the meeting prepares enough to make formal introductions for everyone. The worst is being in a meeting with someone nobody knows, and was never introduced nor given the opportunity to introduce themselves.
My manager does it perfectly, she quickly goes around and says “for the new folks on the call, that’s Bertram, he does x, y, and z. That’s pishadoot, they’ve been here for years and do a, b, and c. It reminds her team that she values them and shows the outside folks that’s she’s a competent manager.
A supervisor introducing their people works, but giving people the chance to introduce themselves sends a signal from the outset that they’re invited to speak at the meeting. Usually that’s my preference, but it depends on the meeting.
A good example of when I think a supervisor should introduce everyone is a meeting where a team lead is presenting a plan to a director that doesn’t know everyone - the team lead introduces their people, and does the majority of the speaking, but can turn to a technician or an area subject expert to field a specific question that comes up.
To me generally, my people are at a meeting because their input is valued. I want them to speak for themselves, and that begins with them introducing themselves. If you’re there to observe I’ll introduce you, otherwise I want them to know they’re there to listen AND speak.
I’ve worked with people who will sometimes interrupt the natural pre-meeting banter to force an icebreaker. Like, what the hell do you think we were just doing you corporate ass-hat?
Frankly, I’m deeply suspicious of anyone who forces a “round robin” of any kind during any meeting. It very rarely has any value and tells me that that person shouldn’t be running the meeting, or that that particular meeting didn’t need to happen.
As another poster said, sometimes it’s useful and sometimes it’s a waste of time.
I frequently encounter meetings with outside entities for a bunch of stuff related to various large projects/initiatives and the outside entity will bring anywhere from 3-8 random people I’ve never heard of, and in turn we bring a similar number of people they haven’t met or interacted with directly (a good example is a logistics director or facilities manager for a building).
Introductions to go around the room in the format “hello, I’m ________ and I’m the ________, I do the __________ for _________” are good to just be like “oh ok you’re the ______ person, got it”
Going around the room and asking everyone to say where they’re from and their favorite food and least favorite movie, ALWAYS a waste of time unless you’re a grade schooler.
Edit: ignore the italics, not sure why they’re there and I don’t really care to figure it out
Yeah, in meetings with outside teams I can usually understand it and it’s tolerable. But honestly I prefer if the person running the meeting prepares enough to make formal introductions for everyone. The worst is being in a meeting with someone nobody knows, and was never introduced nor given the opportunity to introduce themselves.
My manager does it perfectly, she quickly goes around and says “for the new folks on the call, that’s Bertram, he does x, y, and z. That’s pishadoot, they’ve been here for years and do a, b, and c. It reminds her team that she values them and shows the outside folks that’s she’s a competent manager.
A supervisor introducing their people works, but giving people the chance to introduce themselves sends a signal from the outset that they’re invited to speak at the meeting. Usually that’s my preference, but it depends on the meeting.
A good example of when I think a supervisor should introduce everyone is a meeting where a team lead is presenting a plan to a director that doesn’t know everyone - the team lead introduces their people, and does the majority of the speaking, but can turn to a technician or an area subject expert to field a specific question that comes up.
To me generally, my people are at a meeting because their input is valued. I want them to speak for themselves, and that begins with them introducing themselves. If you’re there to observe I’ll introduce you, otherwise I want them to know they’re there to listen AND speak.