Practice Time
练习时光
Does anyone ever walk into a meeting fired up with enthusiasm? Or do they groan in anticipation of the politicking, the bureaucracy and the office bore taking up what little oxygen remains in the room? And, in any case, all the decisions have probably already been taken, haven't they? Meetings are emotive, perhaps because executives have unrealistic expectations of what can be achieved. People tend to think meetings are for making decisions when they are not, in fact, very good for that. Groups often meet to make decisions but they're doing so for political reasons. So when people are called to a meeting (ostensibly to make a decision) and show up to discover the decision has already been made, they feel used. The formal nature of most meetings also means they are seen as mandatory. If three people meet in a corridor and discuss a project for five minutes, they have had a meeting, and probably an effective one. But most meetings are seen as immovable blocks in diaries. Moreover, they are often scheduled to take place at regular intervals and to last for a set time--neither of which may be necessary.
是否曾有人满怀激情地步入一个会议？抑或他们都在暗自烦恼着即将上演的政治秀、官僚程序和那些把办公室压抑得毫无生气的讨厌鬼？再说，无论如何，一切很可能都已经决定了，不是吗？会议常常是情绪化的，可能是因为管理人员对能够实现的目标抱有不切实际的期望。人们通常倾向于认为开会是为了做决定，但事实上，会议并不适合做决定。团队经常要碰面做出一些决定，但都是出于政治原因。因此，当人们被叫去开会（表面上是为了做决定），却发现决定已经做好了，他们会有被利用的感觉。大多数会议的本质，也意味着它们会被认为是强制性的。如果三个人在走廊里碰面，花5分钟讨论一个项目，那他们就是开了一个会，可能还是一个有效率的短会。但是大多数会议被视为工作日程表中不可更改的部分。而且，它们经常被安排成定期召开，要持续一段规定的时间的活动——而这两者似乎都不是必要的。