Smart phones and meetings

June 22, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The days of only the powerful few getting by with tapping their Blackberries during meetings are long gone.

When was the last time you were in a gathering where more people seemed interested in the topic or the speaker than in whatever was on their Blackberries â?? or iPhones or Treos? Smart phones have become pervasive in professional settings along with expectations of instantaneous responses.

Critics insist the phones detract from tasks at hand and introduce a low grade of chaos. In short, they cause distractions that compromise quality of work and decisions.

However, the upsides are compelling. Business and conversation certainly move faster. And who really wants to be out of contact?

If youâ??re leading a meeting, what are your rules for phones? Do you have rules at all?

If youâ??re the speaker, do you feel itâ??s rude for others to check e-mail â?? or Facebook and Twitter â?? while youâ??re talking?

To what extent are these questions generational? Younger workers have grown up multitasking.

Anyone willing to predict where phone etiquette will settle out?
  • These questions are highly generational. Even at the age of 30, things are so different now than they used to be. For those who can manage to find the right time to check their email/voicemail, these things are amazing for staying in contact and providing good client service. But for those who somehow drop everything the minute an email pops up, I have no idea how any actual work can be getting done throughout the day. (Plus it's frustrating to be talking to someone and have them check their blackberry or email because it dinged. I mean seriously, can't you wait 1 more minute?)
  • Despite the tone of the NYT article today covering this subject, it is NOT old-school for participants in a meeting to concentrate on the matter at hand. Contrary to popular thought, multi-tasking is not really possible and often leads to mistakes or a lack of judgement. Unless one is a doctor or similar sort of person who must be available for health-related emergency calls, there is simply no reason to be otherwise online. If a business matter is so pressing (which does understandably happen from time to time) that a meeting participant must constantly check emails on his/her smartphone, that participant should apologize at the outset to let everyone know the situation or simply not attend the meeting. Not to do so is exceedingly rude to the meeting leader who has spent time preparing for the gathering, as well as to the other participants. While the latter may find themselves bored by the subject or the presentation, such boredom is made even worse by the lack of participation by those engaged in echatting.

    For the record, I myself am not a Luddite. I create and maintain several websites and am a smartphone nut. I find myself constantly checking my emails and Facebook page -- something that really has not added to any real productivity. I will soon be moving from my well-used MotoQ to the new Palm Pre.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.