Testing the Waters – Managing First Meetings

Dr. Earl R. Smith II
Managing Partner, The Federal Circle
DrSmith@Dr-Smith.com
Dr-Smith.com

I’ve recently written a couple of articles focusing on the dynamics of initial meetings. They have drawn a pile of e-mails – mostly war stories about lost potential and illusions that never became real. Thanks to all of you who took the time to write. A writer’s most gratifying experience is always to receive responses to what has been written. And thanks for the suggestions that have become the central ideas of this piece.

Management of first meetings is an art that takes considerable focus and discipline. This is particularly true because most people have a relatively unstructured and fairly casual approach to meeting someone for the first time. My experience has been that this casualness arises out of a casual approach to life. On more than one occasion I have, in the middle of the networking event, had the feeling that I was witnessing anything from ‘the uninformed showing the unwilling how to do the unnecessary’ to the Mad Hatter’s tea party.

As someone who is continually fascinated by the incredible diversity of a human experience, I tend to approach each new meeting as a journey into that the diversity. I am stunned to find that most of the people that I meet are simply going through the motions – as if they were sleepwalking through their own life. And, as the old saw goes, you cannot awaken someone who is pretending to be asleep.

Over the years I have developed particular habits that have proven very useful in managing first meetings. Here are some of my thoughts in the area:

Come with an agenda: I am amazed at how many people will rave about a book that suggests that they should live a purpose driven life and then behave as the prescription does not relate to them in the conduct of their own life. But I often can see no purpose at all in their actions or conduct.

Whenever I meet someone for the first time my curiosity drives me to seek answers to some very basic questions. Who is this person? What has been their life experience? What can I learn from them? What common grounds can we find for building a sustainable relationship?

Well anyway, you get the idea. Meeting someone who lacks purpose is like shaking hands with a jellyfish. Not only is the experience going to be formless but you will probably get stung in the process. Showing up with an agenda will actually attract those others who have also come with an interest in substance. Purposeful people are generally a magnet for people pursuing a purpose.

Follow-up with purpose: If I have seen any potential at all as a result of a first meeting I reflexively generate an e-mail within 24 hours. I outline those areas where I feel I can be of service to the other person. I request that they do the same and that, after I had had a chance to review their suggestions and they mine, that we organize a second meeting.

Over the years I have found that this is a wonderful tool for separating out those individuals who are capable of substantive relationships from those who are addicted to lightweight chatter. Members of the first group generally take my e-mail as a compliment and a challenge. I’ve spent the time thinking through the possibilities for our relationship and have tried to suggest the beginnings of a foundation for ongoing mutual benefit. These people, after they get over the shock of being treated with consideration and courtesy, tend to respond by generating a list of their own. It is really only after both lists are on the table that we can come to some conclusion about whether are not it makes any sense for the both of us to put energies into building a friendship or business relationship.

People in the second category generally do not respond at all to my follow-up e-mail. I take this is a huge blessing. The approach allows me to filter out people who lack substance and focus – and to keep from wasting any time at all interacting with them.

Agree on a task for each: Another approach that I have found very productive is to agree during the initial meeting on a task that each of the participants will follow up on. This is a wonderful filter. It quickly identifies those individuals who are professional ‘excuse merchants’. The comic relief in this strategy comes with the incredibly convoluted excuses as to why an individual has not gotten around to following up on their commitment.

A second benefit from this strategy is that it gives you, early in the relationship, a measure of the professional standards and integrity of the individual you have just met. By seeing how they honor their commitments and what they see as sufficient to honor those commitments early on, you can save yourself a lot of frustration from relying on people who are essentially unreliable.

Give them an assignment: If you are meeting with a person who is going to be subordinate to you in any ongoing relationship, an initial meeting is a very good time to give them an assignment. I always pick some task which can be completed within a relatively short period of time and with a modest amount of effort. The response gives me a gauge of their capability under like pressure. If you think about it, this is a great test. If they can’t manage to deliver under light pressure how do you expect they’re going to respond when the going gets tough?

Initial meetings are a first opportunity for gathering information on the person you have just met. When I work with coaching clients I try to get them to see first meetings as opening a file on the person and having that person open a file on them. If you are going to avoid the grief of missed opportunities you have to pay attention – make sure that your file accumulates substantive and accurate information on the person you have just met. You also have to make sure that the information which accumulates in their file accurately represents who you are and what you are able to contribute to the relationship.

Don’t listen to the propaganda: Hubris is BS with an advanced degree. One of the characteristics of well educated individuals is that they easily lose track of reality amongst the maze of their own linguistic capabilities. My own degree, Ph.D., is often described as ‘piled higher and deeper’.

Well educated people tend to carry around a well rehearsed pile of crap. They bring it to networking meetings and offer liberal portions to anyone in attentive enough to consume it. The trick here is to pay absolutely zero attention to this ‘I am’ stuff and, instead try to find out through substantive experience who they really are.

Here is an example that might help in this area. Let’s say I’m meeting someone for the first time and that the discussion is focused on evaluating them as a potential team member for a new start-up that I’m organizing. Prior to our meeting I will have seen their resume and possibly talked to people who know them. Most people will organize that first session based on that information. It probably won’t surprise you to hear that that’s not the way I do it.

Well before the initial meeting I assign the individual the task of thinking through how they would approach the role that they are seeking to play on the team. I say something like, “OK … we’re going to explore the possibility that you will become the head of marketing for my new company. Prior to our meeting, rough out your first six weeks for me and tell me how you would approach the role. Be as specific as possible when referring to challenges, connections, resources and capabilities. Give me an idea of what you would be like in that role. E-mail me your thoughts at least twenty four hours prior to our session.”

There are several amazingly productive results from this approach. The first is that it separates out the consultant mentality from the line executive one. Implementers tend to get right down to the business of planning implementation. Consultants implement by extending the conversation about implementation. Individuals who have trouble focusing or delivering on a deadline tend to balk at the request. I get a chance to see how a person thinks through a particular challenge before I actually sit down to meet them. So, by the time we finally do sit down, I have a very strong suspicion that this person is worth getting to know.

Don’t assume: It is very important in the early part of a relationship to keep careful track of the veracity and reliability of the other person. Don’t assume that what you are being told is accurate or reliable. There will be plenty of time for trust once trust is established. But in the beginning set down the marker that you expect a certain level of response and integrity. It will establish you as a person of substance as well as one who requires substance in return.

One of the easiest ways to check up on a person is to talk somewhat extensively to people who you know and who know the person you have just met. I spend part of each initial meeting trying to identify common acquaintances or links to people that I know well. Quite often I will send out queries to people who might be able to help me take a measure of this new acquaintance. Most are quite willing to discuss their experiences (positive, negative or neutral) about anyone except close relatives.

Reassess at the end of six to eight weeks: I tag each new contact with a starting date. Over the years I have discovered that if a new relationship does not generate mutual benefits within the first six to eight weeks it is unlikely that it will it all. Yes, I know, you can make the exception argument. But I long ago ceased maintaining two or three thousand connections against the hope that one of them might generate something of value.

The truth is that mutual benefit does not come by chance. Developing the trust that must underlie any productive relationship takes a commitment from both sides and extended effort. The potential begins when two people get to know each other and decide that they like the other person and can trust them. At the end of six to eight weeks this kind of relationship will either begin to grow or probably won’t at all.

Treat virtual meetings the same as face-to-face ones: This is one of those tips that, when I suggest it, people seem surprised that they haven’t thought about it before. It is even more important to approach virtual meetings with purpose and focus. Initial assessments are much more difficult when you can’t see the person you are interacting with. The fact that you may not be listening to their voice but reading their e-mails adds another layer of complexity.

As an example, I am a regular user of an online networking community called Linked In. I’ve found the service is very useful and have developed many interesting and worthwhile relationships because of it. But I have also found that there can be a tendency to overstate or downright mislead through the publication of fictionalized profiles. As a result when I am beginning a relationship with someone I have met through Linked In I pay even more attention to verify. I also, by the way, expect that the other person, if they’re serious, we’ll be doing the same thing.

In any case the theme is the same for virtual meetings. Set expectations, assign tasks, generate follow-up e-mails and develop metrics to determine whether the relationship is actually worth the time.

Amateurs have connections while professionals get results: This suggestion is one that may give some readers considerable difficulty. I know many people who seem to think that the value of their network is tied to the number of people in the network. But a little probing quickly demonstrates that they don’t know the vast majority of the people in their network at all and, of the rest, most are weak to very weak connections. Where I come from we refer to this so called ‘network’ as an untested and mostly unreliable mailing list.

It is a very good idea to remember that the purpose of any relationship is to satisfy needs. And by that I mean your needs and the needs of the other person. This is the simplest equation but it can’t be avoided. Without constantly reviewing your relationships and the energy that you are putting into them, you run the risk of wasting time – both yours and those on the other side.

The purpose of people on this earth: After some years of study, I’ve come to the conclusion that the principle reason that people take such a casual approach to first meetings is that they haven’t yet found a non-instrumental reason for people being on the planet. This might seem an odd point to make given the relatively structured approach that I have suggested. But there is a difference between taking a purposeful approach to building relationships and an instrumental approach to using people to your own purpose. The latter may be an accurate measure of how good you are at exploiting the people you meet while the former, I have found, is a wonderful measure of how good a partner a person will be.

© Dr. Earl R. Smith II

~~~~~~~~~~

Related Articles:

• Finding Meaning Without Manufacturing Meaning

• Making the Possible Probable

• The Price of Intemperance

• Adults in Wonderland

• Finding a Mirror – Realizing

• Non-Cumulative Relationships

~~~~~~~~~~