They Said What? How to Keep Post-Meeting Conversations Productive

Everyone has overheard or participated in informal discussions that happen after meetings are over. Sometimes, employees hold these conversations to clarify topics raised in the meeting or to brainstorm about next steps. However, the impromptu “meeting after the meeting” can also be an opportunity for people to gripe and sow dissent.

People talk; post-meeting conversations are inevitable. However, leaders who build a positive company culture and effectively structure meetings can help make these discussions productive.

Why Toxic Post-Meeting Conversations Happen

Leadership expert, professor, and author Phillip G. Clampitt zeroes in on the causes and cures for post-meeting toxicity in an MIT Sloan Management Review article. He notes that leaders often unwittingly prime employees for destructive grumbling with the way they conduct meetings. Clampitt offers three examples:

1. Leaders who indiscriminately share information without giving people context are bound to ignite unhappy conversations after the meeting ends. They can prevent poor reactions by connecting the dots to help people make sense of what they are hearing.
   
   
2. Sometimes, leaders invite diverse employees to a meeting to make everyone feel included and get multiple perspectives. While the idea is sound, the gatherings can backfire because people with various backgrounds may have different concerns about how the meeting’s topic will affect them. What may be a non-item for one group could be a hot-button issue for another.
   
   
3. Often, leaders think they have meeting attendees’ buy-in, understanding, or alignment. However, they may incorrectly make that assumption because they ask for feedback ineffectively. For example, they may wait until the end of the meeting and say I only have a few minutes for questions. Or they may tell people to email them with questions or comments. Or they may make leading statements like, “I think you’ll agree this is the best approach.”

Clampitt calls these tactics “faux queries” that limit questioning and prevent understanding. Leaders who practice them may think they’ve handled meetings well when, in fact, they were counterproductive and almost certainly will generate back-room discussions.

Getting a Handle on “After Meetings”

Leaders have multiple opportunities to formulate successful meetings that have lasting benefits. As Clampitt notes:

“What leaders do before, during, and after the formal meeting greatly influences the dynamics of later gatherings.”

He recommends five strategies for people conducting meetings to prevent or limit toxic post-gatherings.

1. Improve meeting choreography.
   Clampitt suggests that to be successful, leaders should plan their meetings like a choreographer assembles a dance troop to perform. He writes: “A leader can shape the conversational space before, during, and after a discussion, thereby influencing the acceptance of key decisions, the performance of critical personnel, and team spirit.”

Before a meeting occurs, leaders should think through the dynamics, including:

• The meeting’s purpose, “Why is this meeting necessary?”
• Attendees, “Who should be invited to attend?”
• Topics to cover and not cover.
• Whether it should be in-person or virtual.

Clampitt cautions against holding unnecessary meetings, which can cause discontent. He also believes leaders should only invite the most pertinent people, as larger gatherings increase the potential for post-meeting negativity. Finally, he notes that meetings should be held in person when possible. Clampitt cites a study on hybrid work environments that shows that face-to-face meetings generate more collaboration.

2. Devise protocols for communicating change.

Often, meetings are occasions for leaders to let their staff know about pending changes. Learning about a significant transition will always spur discussions after the meeting. Leaders should cover key points when announcing the change to help steer these sidebars in the right direction and prevent employees from overreacting or responding negatively. For example:

• How the decision was made.
• Why the decision was made.
• Why alternative solutions were ruled out.
• How the change aligns with the company’s mission, vision, and culture.
• How the change will affect the organization at all levels.
• The impact the change will have on staff.

Leaders who include these topics in a meeting where change is announced demonstrate respect for employees. They help employees understand the decision-making process and set expectations for sharing news in the future. Employees who are better informed about changes are more likely to get on board with them.

3. Make connections between groups.

Often disruptive post-sessions bubble up in silos because attendees represent diverse perspectives and specialties. Leaders can ward them off by making connections for these people before and during the meeting. Their tactics may include:

• Sharing background information before the meeting.
• Acknowledging and honoring diverse perspectives during the meeting.
• Encouraging meeting participants to express their views during the meeting.
• Asking if any topics need further explanation during the meeting.

Leaders who use these strategies help identify and sanction various points of view. As a result, participants are more likely to appreciate and collaborate with others in and after the meeting.

4. Tempering emotions and personal concerns.

Sometimes, employees have an emotional response to things discussed in meetings. Leaders would be wise to allow them to voice their concerns while the group is together instead of letting them fester and erupt in conversations later. By letting people express their feelings, leaders show them respect and have an opportunity to channel their reactions into a reasonable dialogue.

Leaders should also avoid personalizing issues and not identifying a problem or situation with an individual or group. Having participants focus on solutions they can create together is much more productive. This approach reduces the likelihood of resentment and finger-pointing after the meeting ends.

5. Advocate for pushback during the meeting.

Some leaders fear pushback and structure meetings to prevent it. This tactic usually backfires as disgruntled employees will certainly air their opinions with each other after the meeting.

Clampitt argues that leaders should not avoid pushback during meetings but instead should allow and be prepared for it. They are then poised to respond to and negotiate issues to find solutions more suitable for everyone.

Clampitt’s recommendations are only feasible if leaders develop a company culture that prioritizes specific behaviors. To hold effective meetings, they must already have a work environment where people feel safe speaking up and know their opinions will be valued. The culture must also be grounded in mutual respect, trust, transparency, and collaboration.

Once they have established a dynamic workplace culture, leaders can make meetings productive sessions that help drive success. And properly structured business gatherings help channel positive conversations after the meeting is adjourned.