Hello, we are SMART5 !
Introduction
We are all coming from MAOSCM. We choose this name because we believe SMART is a useful tool in high performance collaboration. The meaning of SMART is coming from our core subject of project management. It includes Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-related. 5 means we have 5 members in this group and each of team member represents one of the key components in SMART.
Let's introduce our group members.
Name
Student ID |
Individual Introduction
|
Joyce Ngan (left top)
52159589 |
As a Logistics Supervisor, I have to deal with many parties, from internal department to external supplier and factories. So the skill of communication with different people is very important to me and of course I hope I can learn more communication skill from this course.
|
Dennis Wong (right top)
52118626 |
Supply Chain Analyst in multinational semiconductor company. Need to work with APAC & EMEA partners to fix and monitor supply chain operation issue.
|
Iris Choi (left bottom)
52144214 | |
Cathy Chui (middle)
52044412 |
Working at the HK Government as a supplies supervisor, who is responsible for purchasing office supplies to fulfill internal operations and demand.
|
Cyndi Sin (right bottom)
95063278 |
Sales Operations Manager in an ICT service provider, has to work with various departments and ensure a smooth, feasible and practical operation processes in supporting sales force.
|
Our Logo
The Logo has 5 colors which represent individual of us. The wording "5" contains the five colors which represent us!
Our Goal
Our goal is to learn how to apply collaboration into our daily life in achieving the same objective when diverse opinions and conflict incurred, especially at work level!
Topic - Exciting Us The Most
In every single day, we are facing various types of people, and interact with each other, collaboration would be an art in how we can well integrated, interacted and behaved amongst us. With high capability in adopting collaboration, our lives would go easier……
Additional Topics We Want to Learn
What types of communications skill should we use in the meeting to make collaboration when the meeting has many types of personality group member? This is an additional topic we would like to learn in this class.
Our Myth
“Meeting is a Good Platform for Collaborations!” Is It Always True?
EXTENSION
Definition
Definition
Formal or informal deliberative assembly of individuals called to debate certain issues and problems, and to take decisions. Formal meetings are held at definite times, at a definite place, and usually for a definite duration to follow an agreed upon agenda.
Format:
Since meeting can be in various formats, such as meeting face by face, through video conferencing, tel-conferencing, in large group across various departments, or just a few people from the same team, whatever the format is...... meeting is a platform for people to meet each other in achieving the same goals or targets.
Ususally, meetings are combining at least the following four dimensions. (Pallotta, Niekrasz & Purver, 2005)
Ususally, meetings are combining at least the following four dimensions. (Pallotta, Niekrasz & Purver, 2005)
1. The setup of the meeting
2. The content of the meeting: Topics
3. The dynamics of the meeting: Discussion
4. The outcomes of the meeting: Decision
2. The content of the meeting: Topics
3. The dynamics of the meeting: Discussion
4. The outcomes of the meeting: Decision
Pros:
- Direct communication
Meeting benefit for emotional expression found in face to face conversations. It is helps for define the importance of the issue to particular parties.
- Improve immediate response
Meeting involve relevant parties, immediate feedback can be easily reach. Decision can be more easily make in a short period of time.
- Avoid mis-interpretation by using written communication format
Comparing with email, the length of content will be shorter. Meeting can deliver the message to the receiver more precise and accurate. Some of the time, the recipient may forget to respond to one or more arguments in the reply.
- Monitor team operation status by routine meeting
By routine meeting, manager can easy to understand the process from staffs regularly.
Cons:
- Time consuming
When meeting involve various departments or too many participants, it incur conflict of interest while each department or participants have their own perspectives and position. Extra time is needed for compromise.
- High operating cost
According to a research paper, “Meeting Analysis: Findings from Research and Practice”, (Romano and Nunamaker, 2001) in average of 8.4 hours per week was spent in meetings. It occupied huge resource from management team which implied huge staff cost was spent for meeting.
- Incur Direct confrontation
If any participant with less emotional control ability, they insist their point of view may easily incur direct confrontation to others.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Meeting involves facilitator and participants. For example, facilitator can be leader or one of the participants. They have to perform their leadership skills for improving team building and open communications. "Leadership is to engage the right people, at the right times, and the right degree in creative work" (Amabile & Khaire, 2008). Leaders also have to control the agenda, rhythm and the length of entire meeting. Critical thinking, 6 thinking hats and literal thinking can be applied for improve meeting efficient.
Participant should be well prepared before the meeting. They have also need to raise constructive opinions in their spectrum.
Furthermore, effective communication for both meeting facilitator and participant are important. The main qualities are correctness, clarity, conciseness and courtesy (Rai, 2009). So, the meeting will be easier in time-control and avoid deviation of the meeting progress.
Furthermore, effective communication for both meeting facilitator and participant are important. The main qualities are correctness, clarity, conciseness and courtesy (Rai, 2009). So, the meeting will be easier in time-control and avoid deviation of the meeting progress.
However, will this platform would be a good one for collaborations! It would be at the practical level instead of conceptual level...... to test whether the concept or theory is true or not have to go through series of practical experimental exercises.
Let's see discuss and explore whether our myth is always true or not!!!
Let's see discuss and explore whether our myth is always true or not!!!
Reference
Amabile, A.T., Schatzel, E.A., Moneta, G.B., and Kramer, S.J. (2006), Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support, Harvard Business Review, The Leadership Quarterly, 15 (2004) pp.5-32
Amabile, A.T., and Khaire, M (2008), Creativity and the Role of the Leader, Harvard Business Review, 86(10) pp.100-109
Ferguson Publishing (2009), Team Goal Setting and Negotiating, In Ferguson Publishing. Teamwork skills, 2009 pp. 113-134
Rai, S.M. Rai (2009), Effective communication, Himalaya Pub. House, 2009
Rai, S.M. Rai (2009), Effective communication, Himalaya Pub. House, 2009
Romano, N.C.(2001), Meeting analysis: findings from research and practice Tulsa Univ., OK, USA, 3-6 Jan. 2001, pp.1-13
Vivacqua A.S., Marques L.C., Ferreira M.S. and Souza J. M.,(2008) Information Needs for Meeting Facilitation, LNCS 5411, 2008, pp.57-64
Vincenzo Pallotta, John Niekrasz and Matthew Purver (2005) Collaborative and Argumentative Models of Meeting Discussion, DARPA-funded CALO1 project and the Swiss National research project.
Vincenzo Pallotta, John Niekrasz and Matthew Purver (2005) Collaborative and Argumentative Models of Meeting Discussion, DARPA-funded CALO1 project and the Swiss National research project.
Response to the comments:-
Replied to Nassri Khalid, we agreed that meeting as a collaborative platform to facilitate and monitor the working progress and final outcome. On the contrary, too much meetings will create burden and workload to the participants, may incur adverse impact.
Replied to YuenMelanie, high level and senior management meeting can't be avoided. For national level, meeting for political leaders is to show the direction and friendship between countries. From the B2B point of view, meeting would help to build the partnership relations between organizations.
Further, political and public interest related meeting like Government committee or advisory boards must be conducted as those are formal meetings which require a formal documentation for record process.
I would say that meeting is a great way of ensuring that all members of the group are in compliance to what the main purpose of a project is. After the meeting they should continue to do follow up meetings to ensure that they are still working on the right path. All though too many meetings is a time consuming process that would take too much time out of the schedule for the members of a project and would result in much slower results. That is why I would argue that meetings is great for collaboration work, but too many is not good for the final work.
ReplyDeleteWe agree that meeting as a collaborative platform to facilitate and monitor the working progress and final outcome. On the contrary, too much meetings will create burden and work load to the participants, may incur adverse impact.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I like your myth! It's not too conceptual and easy to relate to. As the previous commenter said meetings tend to be a time consuming process. When there are 5 people in a group in which all members study and work, it is problematic to find a suitable meeting time for everyone.
ReplyDeleteThis myth made me think about the work process for my team (Beehive) for this course. Our group's first blog entry was made without a team meeting. We only shared our views via emails and google docs. Still we were able to make a coherent blog entry and present it in a way the audience could understand. This leads me to think that sometimes I feel most meetings (may it be face to face or video conferencing) are just for the purpose of "pretending to be busy and efficient". I would like to react to this myth by stating companies would function even better if they would drop their team meetings by at least 50% and spent this time finding other ways to innovate.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe group has pointed out the numerous formats that the mettings can take in today's business environment. It seems to me that despite the technological advances face-to-face meetings remain at the core of doing business. According to a Forbes study 84% of people prefer to conduct meetings in person (http://www.forbes.com/forbesinsights/Business_Meetings_FaceToFace/index.html). It seems that people are almost unable to fully engage in a collaboration unless they see the person they are working with. We make time-consuming business trips just to be able to say to our business partner what we easily could have written in a 5-minute email; as business leaders we spend hours on 'managing by walking around'; in cross-department projects so often we waste time on mind-numbing boring meeting going over the same issues over and over again.. Business is supposed to be rational. Business should be all about efficiency and productivity. Apparently it's not. If we look at how we actually do the work - through personal meetings in this case - it seems that business is more about satisfying the basic human needs - the need to socialize and belong. In this light, it is a little less surprising why we may think that “Meeting is a Good Platform for Collaborations!”.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAgreed that meeting plays an important role in effective collaboration. But other factors, such as personal attitudes, time sensitivity, team structure, relationship building, building trust, etc. could also be important to collaborations.
ReplyDeleteFor meeting itself, meeting should be effective for collaboration to happen. Ineffective meeting could not result in effective collaboration.
There should be a lot of preparations before meetings to be held (or using meeting as a way to meet certain objectives). I believe, at least, the followings could be important factors to have effective meetings.
A)Channel of Meeting (formal face-to-face, formal video conferencing, meet during a social gathering, instant messaging, etc.). Different approaches would be adopted for different channels. For example, we cannot discuss in front of a laptop computer which showing a lot of financial data in a social gathering.
B)Agenda (what should be discussed, including objectives of the meeting)
C)Layout of meeting (sitting plan, venue, etc.)
D)Understand responsibility of meeting attendants (whether the right person is being invited, what suggestions their role can give, etc.)
E)Determine “Key to Success” / basic goals to be achieved before meeting held. The keys and goals set had to be mutual agreed at the beginning of the meeting to avoid misunderstanding on the meeting purpose.
F)Make clear conclusion after meeting held: Many would miss this part, because there are a lot of ideas flew during the meeting. But attendants may lost in what had been discussed, agreed IF no conclusions are made before leaving meeting place.
Simply looking at this group blog’s template gives me a sense of energy!!
ReplyDeleteThe idea about meeting nowadays comes in many different forms catches my interest. I do agree that sometimes meeting may not be able to achieve effective collaboration efforts; however, does different meeting styles all create the same level of collaboration results? Would a face to face meeting a more meaningful one for effective collaborative effort than a videoconferencing, or which combinations works out the best in a practical setting?
I do believe that meeting is still a good platform for collaboration. Though a lot of people don’t like business meeting, effective collaboration can’t be established without a well-organized meeting. A small group meeting of 2-4 persons works best at exchange ideas whereas a conference meeting is needed for pulling people and resources together on a larger scale. One may think that online meetings seem to be the leading trend and yet it could not substitute face to face meetings in many ways. However I believe nothing yet online can be a substitute for a hand shake when President Obama met with Chinese President Hu Jintao earlier last year.
High level and senior management meeting can’t be avoided. For national level, meeting for political leaders is to show the direction and friendship between countries. For B2B point of view, meeting would helps to build the partnership relations between organizations.
DeleteFurther, political and public interest related meeting like Government committee or advisory boards must be conducted as those are formal meetings which require a formal documentation for record process.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt seems difficult to say meeting is a good platform for collaborations or not. It always depends on the effectiveness of the meeting. It is believed that effective meeting can help to achieve better collaboration, and better collaboration can lead effective meeting. Their relation is interactive. Here are simple tips of effective meeting for collaborations:
ReplyDelete1) Objectives Setting for the Meeting - set objectives before the meeting, which include or align the goals of the team.
2) Individual Preparation - all team members need to do preparation for the meeting, such as think one possible solution to the problem of the meeting topic. So that the brainstorming process can be speeded up and it helps team members to actively participate in the meeting with better quality discussion.
3) Work Allocation - confirm the tasks list with the role of team members before finishing the meeting. This tasks list can let all members understand their roles and responsibilities to avoid conflict in collaboration.
In our competitive business environment, meetings are essential in almost all companies. Management leaders regard meetings as a good platform to communicate with subordinates and know what subordinates think. Actually, meeting is a good opportunity to increase the cooperation among team members. Members could express their views and opinions during the meeting in order to let leaders gather all opinions for the concern issue. However, I think meeting could increase collaboration based on many factors. One factor is the personality of participants. I have experienced on how one's personality damage the effectiveness of meeting. During my meeting, someone always criticize others wrong things to hide his/her improper actions. This makes the victims provide the similar things to protect themselves. This totally delayed the whole meeting process. I admit that meeting is good to collaboration, that's why business leaders still emphasis on meeting as a good way for collaboration. But leaders should also need to consider other important factors which could affect the efficiency of meetings.
ReplyDeleteThis group brings out a controversial topic: Meeting is a Good Platform for Collaborations! Is it always true?
ReplyDeleteI believed that if meeting held in effectiveness, efficiency and productivity way, meeting should be a good platform for communication and collaboration. Unavoidably, meeting still is a usual way for getting the different ideas and resources, and consensus among a small group or even across a countries. However, in the business world, many people are complaining that meeting is wasting their time and making them to have over time work to finish the regular task. It also happens in my company and I would like to share our solution.
My company got many complaints from different departments about meeting during appraisal. HR department was appointed to handle this problem seriously. After lots of interviews with different colleagues and consult from expects, they set some rules for meeting and provide workshop to teach each colleagues about how to hold an effectiveness, efficiency and productivity meeting. Here are the main rules for enhancing the collaborations in the meeting:
1) Agenda should be sending out at least 24 hours for participants’ preparation.
2) No meeting is allowed if no addenda and not 24 hours notification.
3)The agenda should state out the points that what is the issue will be going to discuss and the lead time
The host, secretary, and the observer should be assigned on the agenda. The role of the observer is to jot down any late comer, any overrun of each section, and report them at the end of the meeting.
4) Any topics are out of agenda should put into parking log, it will review at the end of the meeting and may assign another meeting to discuss.
After that, most of the colleagues reflected that the rules really help for improving the quality of the meeting, people are happy with the result.
Posts above discuss many on the efficiencies of meeting in terms of its cost (time-consuming), but a few on the benefit side. To analyze if meeting is a good platform, I think it heavily depends on the purpose/context of the meeting & the sub-culture group involving in the meeting.
ReplyDeleteGenerically speaking, meeting is a good at capturing tacit knowledge & combining explicit knowledge from involving people’s collaboration in discussion. In terms of knowledge management (KM), different KM mechanisms are suitable in dealing different KM processes including discovery, capture, sharing and application. Meeting is a KM mechanism for knowledge capture by internalization & knowledge discovery by combination. One of a good example is brain-storm meeting. It enables and encourages peoples to express their ideas verbally while others will be inspired by ideas to having some new ideas.
To justify that the myth is true, (1) the task involved should be low uncertainty, (2) the knowledge is easily to be expressed & explicit, and (3) the organizational strategy trends to be differential. As for the culture, (4) higher the incentive to express knowledge of the subculture group is, the more the efficient.
To make use of the justifications above, the meeting should be used in the senses that:
(1) Make the tasks discussed lower uncertainty, e.g. discuss the discovered problems as soon as possible.
(2) Unbundle to smaller matters to discuss in a manner of more frequently & agile.
(3) Use the meeting to capture & combine new ideas, not for routine stuff, nor for low cost strategy.
(4) Encourage the culture of opinion expressions, e.g. ensure everyone able to express idea safety without punishment (negative reinforcement)
For more information & details about agile meeting: http://www.outformations.com/resources/OutformationsAgileMeetingsSlides.pdf
Reference:
Becerra-Fernandez, I., Gonzalez, A., Sabherwal, R., Knowledge Management: Challenges, Solutions, and Technologies, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004. ISBN: 0-13-101606-7.
I like this myth very much because this is the question that I always asked myself. I would like to share my experience with you.
ReplyDeleteI am working at a professional body which is related to a lot of committee works. All the decisions must be approved by different levels of committees. All the committee members are the members of our professional body and being the committee members is a voluntarily contribution to our professional body. Therefore, one of my greatest challenges of my job is how to make the committee members work together effectively and make the decision as soon as possible.
Good preparation is very important. So I spend a lot of time to make all the information in an organized and easy to understand with a clear objective in the beginning. I send the information to all the members by email and ask them to discuss and make a decision through email. Finally, it takes 14 days for them to confirm and approve the decision. Then I realize that email may not be a good and effective platform for them. Next time, members agree to have a physical meeting. I send the meeting information to members 7 days before the meeting. Decision is approved and confirmed by the members within 10 minutes during the meeting. So, from my current experience, “Meeting is a Good Platform for Collaborations!” is true for my work. I think it is because meeting “force” the members focus and concentrate on one thing. It increase the effectiveness.
In my point of view, meeting means communication. A good communication platform should be created before you design to lead a team to be the best performance.
ReplyDeleteIn my real situation, first thing I have planned to do is create a good communicate platform when I join a new team. I am a supervisor in my company, I lead a team with around 20 subordinate. In my daily work, I must perform morning briefing and coaching to my subordinate which is the goal of that day, what we have to achieve and so on.
Communication and collaboration between human beings, this is used on daily basis in order for people to communicate at work, home, and in a social life. This is very important in order for others to understand our point of views and for us to understand theirs. We all come from different cultures, religions and languages, but we all seem to find a way to communicate in order to understand each other. It is because of communication that collaboration and cooperation occur. Because it can help push till we have finished our tasks and goals. It gives me good ability in a variety of fields
So that, I really like your myth.
What my believe is that, the platform is necessary such as face to face meeting, video conference, or phone. One thing I needed to add to these platform to increase collaboration is the personal contribuation within these platform. On the other hand, each format of so called meeting might have each advantage and disadvantage in terms of collaborative level.
ReplyDeleteFor example: face to face conference, when the firm is dealing with the other firm for the first time, most likely each will send a repersentative to talk with each other. The advantage of face to face meeting has its advantage of knowing each other better by observe the reaction, gesture, facial expression. Once two firm gets familiar with each other, it is often shifted to tel-conference to cut time and cost.
Different situation will use different meething style to match its necessity. Therefore, the question is whether we should challenge the question of "Meeting is a Good Platform for Collaborations" but rather which meething style generate better collaborations
Meeting without any doubts is a very good way to improve a collaborations.
ReplyDeleteSometimes, as I read also in other comments, it will be difficult to combine different views and this kind of meeting can waste precious time for our job or appointments during the day, but there are some things that can't be discuss in other way, as an important business goals or important decision for the company.
What we have to do before a meeting is being ensure that we fix all the goals and all the assumption in order to be prepared to the discussion and take the best decision in less time, this would means that we have to be inform about all the items on the agenda that have to explain:
- Information, if the purpose is talk and communication of datas, facts, decisions;
- Decision-making, when all the participants have to find the solution for a particular situation
- Interlocutory: clarify some ideas about a problem or confuse situation.
(Nenzioni, 2006)
It will be very interesting deepen into a bigger level of meeting, for example G8 (forum of seven major worldwide economies). What that should be one of the most important meeting to take very important decisions about economy and social matters of the world especially in terms of international collaboration, probably is one of the most difficult and unorganized meeting that is not able to fix and respect all the agenda items. How the problems of each country would be combined with the others priority of the world?this table can be really good for collaborations?
Conflict frequently arises when the communication is ineffective. Ineffective communication can cause stereotypes and jeopardize relationship. Moreover, it can lead to diminish motivation for future conversations. It is important to identify the communication channels, since communication process is depended on the channel to pass through the message between the sender and the receiver. Communication channels come in verbal communication and nonverbal communication form, which include financial statements, newsletters, weblogs, email, instant messaging, telephone, video conference, and face-to-face meeting.
ReplyDeleteIn order to choose the best communication channel, one must familiar with the media richness hierarchy (McShane & Travaglione (2007). There are three aspects in the media richness hierarchy. First, rich media simultaneously use more than one communication media, which face-to-face meeting scores high because it includes both verbal and nonverbal communication at the same time. Second, rich media allows instant feedback from receiver to sender. However, immediate feedback does not mean that the response will be the answer to the question and/or solve the problem. It only means that during a face-to-face communication, the receiver has to give the sender some kind of reactions straightaway, however, not necessarily solid problem-solving answers. Third, rich media allow the sender to customize the message to the receiver. Yet, face-to-face communication is time consuming and limited to a few people, compare to computer-mediated communication (such as emails and intranet) with one ‘click’ the message can be broadcasted to everyone in the company.
In conclusion, the best communication channel depends on situations and how many audiences there are. Effective meeting can improve communication. However, not all meetings can be effective; sometimes it can be insufficient and time wasting. Personally, I think face-to-face meeting is a good platform to ask question, but not the best in terms of getting answers.
McShane, S. & Travaglione T. (2007). Organizational Behavior on the Pacific Rim (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Meeting has several different purposes, such as information sharing, negotiation, making business deal or resolving problem. Some people may think that meetings are not necessary to achieve the above purpose. In my opinion, I agree that meeting itself would not bring efficiency to organizations. However, if we avoid the meeting and focus only on our own part can’t help achieving good organizational performance; also, avoiding meeting might also neglect problems and conflicts in the organization that it may one day become a big disaster.
ReplyDeleteNowadays, the business environment is dynamic. As mention by our classmate in the lecture, we are coming from different background, environment and culture. We have different merits while we are bounded in our own rationality. Thus, thinking about how to combine our advantage would help us overcome the challenge and collaborate in such environment.
Overall, I believe meetings are still necessary for EFFECTIVE organization. (i.e the organization which can always do the right things). To solve the mentioned myth, we should better think about how to perform effective meeting in order to bring efficiency to the organization
Agreed that meeting plays an important role in effective collaboration. But other factors, such as personal attitudes, time sensitivity, team structure, relationship building, building trust, etc. could also be important to collaborations.
ReplyDeleteFor meeting itself, meeting should be effective for collaboration to happen. Ineffective meeting could not result in effective collaboration.
There should be a lot of preparations before meetings to be held (or using meeting as a way to meet certain objectives). I believe, at least, the followings could be important factors to have effective meetings.
A) Channel of Meeting (formal face-to-face, formal video conferencing, meet during a social gathering, instant messaging, etc.). Different approaches would be adopted for different channels. For example, we cannot discuss in front of a laptop computer which showing a lot of financial data in a social gathering.
B) Agenda (what should be discussed, including objectives of the meeting)
C) Layout of meeting (sitting plan, venue, etc.)
D) Understand responsibility of meeting attendants (whether the right person is being invited, what suggestions their role can give, etc.)
E) Determine “Key to Success” / basic goals to be achieved before meeting held. The keys and goals set had to be mutual agreed at the beginning of the meeting to avoid misunderstanding on the meeting purpose.
F) Make clear conclusion after meeting held: Many would miss this part, because there are a lot of ideas flew during the meeting. But attendants may lost in what had been discussed, agreed IF no conclusions are made before leaving meeting place.
Of course meeting can be a good platform for collaboration. Some guidelines and materials such as layout format and agenda can help meeting to be a good platform for collaboration but I think such condition much really depends on the personality and attitude of attendance, especially the key person such as project manager and team lead instead of normal audience.
ReplyDeleteI'm working on a project that our project manager, technical engineer and I periodically have meeting with customer's project manager (I call him YY). We always overrun the meeting although we have agreed agenda with committed layout already. YY always off topic to other things that unrelate to the project. Our project manager sometimes pull him back to the items on agenda but he is seldom successful. He also tried to limit the time by lying that there will be another meeting after then. Results were that call another meeting to continue the un-mentioned items. It waste our time but we haven't find the improvement.
I'm not sure if "email conferencing" as what Oanh's group did for the first blog entry is counted as meeting
ReplyDeleteIf so, I tend to agree that meeting is good for collaboration. This is the very moment (no matter how short it is) when different ideas, knowledge, stance, priority, objective meet and room for value adding/creating is discovered, if the meeting is held effectively.
If there's no exchange of ideas in any forms amongst different individuals, how else are they going to collaborate?
On a separate note, in order to save time for daily routine meetings, stand-up meetings can be a good idea. Attendants are forced to think beforehand about what info to mention without the help of any medium like powerpoint, excel files. This helps keep them from sidetracking. One downside of it is that it isn't quite applicable to non-routine meetings.
For more info on stand-up meetings, please refer to
http://jamesshore.com/Agile-Book/stand_up_meetings.html