Meeting NPS

[Dawid Kubicius]

Hi!

We’re currently working on an app that allows you to rate your work meetings. It utilizes the NPS system, a 1 to 10 scale for every meeting. Very intuitive, anonymous, no need for extra work. It basically does all the work in the background. For example it allows for customizable stat comparison.
To use an example: a meeting takes place and immediately after it concludes every participant, who at one point had their calendar integrated with the app, receives a call to rate that meeting. They can do it either immediately, or track back and rate past meetings whenever they have the chance. Also there is an optional comment function. That data is then gathered and used to optimize meetings across the company. Let’s say host AAA has an average score of 5.6 and host BBB has a score of 7.8. You can easily compare their stats and deduce why their scores might be so different. Maybe AAA has meetings that on average last 2 hours, while BBB’s meetings only take half as long, and that’s why his ratings are higher.
There are plenty of possible applications. Most importantly it allows you to reduce the number of pointless meetings and gives you a voice, albeit an anonymous one. It’s designed to make work life easier.

 

[fisicx]

Can’t think of anything less exciting than scoring a meeting. I’d never give a score higher than 1. All meeting are by default tedious, boring, rambling and instantly forgettable. The greater the number of attendees the more they become.

 

[japancool]

Another thing in life that wants a rating.

Not everything can be simplified down to a number between 1-5, you know.

 

[GraemeL]

Another thing in life that wants a rating. Not everything can be simplified down to a number between 1-5, you know.

You are right. BBB got 7.8

 

[Mark T Jones]

It's difficult to see who your target customer would be.

People who hold dull meetings do so because they like it.

People who attend them do so either because they have no choice, or because it's easier than getting on with work.

 

[mattk]

MS Teams already does this at the end of every meeting. I don't think I've ever scored a meeting.

The other issue you'll have is correlation versus causation. How do you know that the score is related to the quality of the host and not network connectivity, attendance punctuality, quality of questions or a vast array of those factors?

 

[Newchodge]

What is NPS?

 

[fisicx]

Never Play Scrabble

 

[BusterBloodvessel]

I spend enough of my life as it js either partaking in meetings, planning meetings, reviewing meeting notes and actions, and in many cases picking up the blower to a colleague after a pointless 2 hour meeting involving 9 members of staff and the two of us instead sort the problem in hand between us in minutes.

so in short, not a f*cking chance do I want to spend more time now rating my meetings after the event! Especially if this would turn into one of those irritating automatic reminder emails every 24 hours politely “reminding” me that I haven’t yet rated the meeting I attended last week and now can’t even remember what it was about.

 

[SillyBill]

Sounds like a peer to peer performance review for the meeting organiser/lead, I see office politics getting even more fraught with an app like this. Don't like someone and it is anonymous? Well drop them a 2 or 3 and get them into the boss's office. Perhaps can see some data obsessed companies liking this, seems quite Amazonian (and lets face it they're successful), personally I think there is enough pressure in office life now, enough data recording and monitoring to not have your meetings scored as well. Where does it end? Ratings on how well you make the tea? We're in danger of dehumanising office workers.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

It's difficult to see who your target customer would be.

People who hold dull meetings do so because they like it.

People who attend them do so either because they have no choice, or because it's easier than getting on with work.

System like that might help identify people who maybe shouldn't be hosting meetings, perhaps because they like them dull. As for people who are forced to attend meetings, that's the point. If we notice they are consistently negative that's feedback in itself. The we know that either we completely change how we do meetings, or just give up on them altogether.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

MS Teams already does this at the end of every meeting. I don't think I've ever scored a meeting.

The other issue you'll have is correlation versus causation. How do you know that the score is related to the quality of the host and not network connectivity, attendance punctuality, quality of questions or a vast array of those factors?

That's a fair point, but if meetings host by one particular person consistently got low ratings then it's would be reasonable to assume it's not because of random occurances, but an issue that happens reapetedly and maybe could be solved.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

What is NPS?

Net Promoter Score, it's the 1 to 10 scale used primarily to rate customer satisfaction. We thought that we might be able to treat meetings as a product and employees as customers.

 

[fisicx]

Still doesn’t change the fact that nobody is going to bother with an app like this. It’s a solution looking for a problem to solve.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

Sounds like a peer to peer performance review for the meeting organiser/lead, I see office politics getting even more fraught with an app like this. Don't like someone and it is anonymous? Well drop them a 2 or 3 and get them into the boss's office. Perhaps can see some data obsessed companies liking this, seems quite Amazonian (and lets face it they're successful), personally I think there is enough pressure in office life now, enough data recording and monitoring to not have your meetings scored as well. Where does it end? Ratings on how well you make the tea? We're in danger of dehumanising office workers.

We are trying to rate meetings, not people. And negative feedback is still feedback. Considering the clearly negative attitude people have towards meetings there is a strong possibility that most of feedback (and it looks like there wouldn't be much of it at all) would be negative. So anything positive would be of great value and could be implemented across the company.

 

[Mark T Jones]

System like that might help identify people who maybe shouldn't be hosting meetings, perhaps because they like them dull. As for people who are forced to attend meetings, that's the point. If we notice they are consistently negative that's feedback in itself. The we know that either we completely change how we do meetings, or just give up on them altogether.

You have identified potential outcomes, but not the question I asked - who is the customer?

Who is going to be sufficiently enthused & motivated to to buy, implement and monitor? That's the fundamental question you need to address.

 

[fisicx]

We are trying to rate meetings, not people.

But that’s what will happen. People will give a rating because they like/dislike people.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

But that’s what will happen. People will give a rating because they like/dislike people.

Whatever the reason for a meeting not being productive, a low rating would indicate a need for change. Maybe less meetings, maybe switching around team structures. As I said, negative feedback could still be useful, if understood correctly.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

You have identified potential outcomes, but not the question I asked - who is the customer?

Who is going to be sufficiently enthused & motivated to to buy, implement and monitor? That's the fundamental question you need to address.

Primarly the people who are looking for any way to improve themselves and get ahead, so managers and meeting hosts. They could use the data gathered from participant ratings to tweak the style of their meeting hosting to maximize productivity. Whether it means shorter meetings, less of them, maybe a change in style. There could be some potential use for that data.

 

[fisicx]

Primarly the people who are looking for any way to improve themselves and get ahead, so managers and meeting hosts. They could use the data gathered from participant ratings to tweak the style of their meeting hosting to maximize productivity. Whether it means shorter meetings, less of them, maybe a change in style. There could be some potential use for that data.

You don’t need an app to do this. Someone looking to improve anything already knows what to do.

 

[Frank the Insurance guy]

That's a fair point, but if meetings host by one particular person consistently got low ratings then it's would be reasonable to assume it's not because of random occurances, but an issue that happens reapetedly and maybe could be solved.

What happens then? If its just a rating and they are consistently low, will there be another meeting to discuss why the score was low and how to improve things?

Not point being able to identify high and low scoring meetings, without supporting information?

I'm busy enough as it is without wasting time on a post meeting review/rating.

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

You don’t need an app to do this. Someone looking to improve anything already knows what to do.

I'm assuming some of that is coming from your experience as a moderator, maybe watching people on forums be negative without offering any worthwhile feedback. Do you think there's any chance for honesty and self-moderation in the workplace? That perhaps if such a system was implemented by higher-ups and presented as a way for the employees to eliminate an element of their job they dislike (long meetings, pointless meetings, hosts they dislike) with a click or two, they would use it as intented?

 

[Dawid Kubicius]

What happens then? If its just a rating and they are consistently low, will there be another meeting to discuss why the score was low and how to improve things?

Not point being able to identify high and low scoring meetings, without supporting information?

I'm busy enough as it is without wasting time on a post meeting review/rating.

There is more data being gathered and processed in the background, stats to compare, etc. Anyone who wants to look at it and utilize it would be free to do so. The entire system would be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

[Mark T Jones]

Primarly the people who are looking for any way to improve themselves and get ahead, so managers and meeting hosts. They could use the data gathered from participant ratings to tweak the style of their meeting hosting to maximize productivity. Whether it means shorter meetings, less of them, maybe a change in style. There could be some potential use for that data.

In reality they are the people you need to be asking for feedback.

Like most 'here is my idea' threads, you are getting feedback from people who aren't your target client - so is frankly, mostly irrelevant (That definitely includes my own views on whether it is good or useful)

Find your target customer and find out what problem they want solved, and what they are happy to pay for.

 

[fisicx]

I'm assuming some of that is coming from your experience as a moderator, maybe watching people on forums be negative without offering any worthwhile feedback. Do you think there's any chance for honesty and self-moderation in the workplace? That perhaps if such a system was implemented by higher-ups and presented as a way for the employees to eliminate an element of their job they dislike (long meetings, pointless meetings, hosts they dislike) with a click or two, they would use it as intented?

This has nothing to do with me being a moderator. It has everything to do with the impracticability of the app. Many businesses won't let you download and integrate anything - not without a lot of testing first. And many workers don't have a PC (construction, manufacturing, food production etc).

And at $7/month per user it's a complete non starter. 10 people is $840/year. That's a fat wodge to spend. Consider also that MS Teams already has an review app for meetings. I suspect there anr many other tools you can integrate with calendars/

If you want a review of your tool, join UKBF as a full member and post in the website reviews forum.

 

[BusterBloodvessel]

I'm afraid you are a classic UKBF new visitor - "here is my idea, please give me feedback (except negative feedback, because I'll just argue with you that I'm right anyway)"

Honestly, this is a terrible idea that would just annoy the tits out of everyone involved in using it.

 

[MattRumbelow]

There's probably some utility in this, and it really depends on the questions being asked. Not just a rating but maybe 'what was the best idea you heard'. There is a route where this makes meetings more democratic and less pointless (double-negative, I know). I think as a service on its own, the rating doesn't provide much, but I could see a lot of companies opting into a meeting assistant app.

For instance, possible functions could include submitting your topic, stopping people from going over their time allowance, allowing people to anonymously vote on ideas (say, two pitched concepts), etc.

I think everyone in this board's negative feelings about meetings shows that the system needs change –so don't necessarily take it as negative feedback on the idea!

 

[InsuranceBroker]

I would rate all work meetings '0' on the basis they are long, boring and a great opportunity only for people who like to talk at people. No app needed.

 

[Alan]

What even a 30 second meeting and the content is 'Well done, here is is a £200,000 extra bonus and 50% pay rise, now get out of here and enjoy yourself' - does that deserve a zero?

 

[InsuranceBroker]

What even a 30 second meeting and the content is 'Well done, here is is a £200,000 extra bonus and 50% pay rise, now get out of here and enjoy yourself' - does that deserve a zero?

Yes.

 

[fisicx]

Yes.

Because you still got the bonus. The meeting itself added nothing of value.

 

[simon field]

Because you still got the bonus. The meeting itself added nothing of value.

Unless they change their mind about the bonus because you couldn’t be bothered to rock up?

 

[fisicx]

Unless they change their mind about the bonus because you couldn’t be bothered to rock up?

You did rock up, you just scored the meeting zero.

 

[AW-UK]

I'm afraid I'm with others on this, it does seem a bit pointless, most work meetings I come away feeling ready to punch someone already without telling them so. I would always score low, management would ignore it as they usually do and carry on doing what they are doing. Maybe there are certain markets that this would benefit but I can't think of any or have experience where one would. No idea what NPS is either, so I thought it was another meeting booking system.

 

[Alan]

I don't quite get how teams can work effectively without occasionally 'meeting' to share the goals, communicate the progress, raise issues.

This is the UK Business forum, are you all really saying you run your businesses without meetings because you would score them all zero.

I'm not arguing the case to the pointless app by the way, but it would seem an incredible mismatch here between meeting callers and meeting attendees and maybe there should be a mandatory score

 

[AW-UK]

I don't quite get how teams can work effectively without occasionally 'meeting' to share the goals, communicate the progress, raise issues.

This is the UK Business forum, are you all really saying you run your businesses without meetings because you would score them all zero.

I'm not arguing the case to the pointless app by the way, but it would seem an incredible mismatch here between meeting callers and meeting attendees and maybe there should be a mandatory score

For me, I get Jira tasks rather than discuss it over a "meeting", the meetings that I do have via Teams I would score them low, not necessarily 0 but certainly less than 3.
This is perhaps unique to me, or others might be in a similar situation, I can only speak for myself, so our task based meetings are converted into Jira tickets and we work through them, we have smaller meetings within the team but they are never "rated" or need to be, we discuss issues that need to be resolved and we usually end up resolving them over the call or at least know how we are going to solve them, then we just get on and do it, much like we would in real life.

It's a bit like having a face to face meeting then filling out a feedback form on how that meeting went, I don't know anyone who would find that useful.

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

’a solution looking for a problem to solve.