Quite often I hear that protocols are too rigid and that to have more fun meetings should be held without a protocol. Another remark in this context may point to agendas and how they lead to sterile discussions.
And I do remember having participated in my share of such meetings. All of them had an awkward atmosphere. People didn’t know how to contribute and hesitated to do so.
Usually, this is the consequence of insecurity. It’s a symptom of the hope that having a well-done agenda will ensure the results one seeks to achieve or keep uncomfortable conversations away. Another hope is that with the proper protocol, everyone will be happy and behave as expected.
But it doesn’t work like this.
The presence of insecurity leads to the desire to have more control which in turn impacts the participants who experience themselves as pushed into a role they find too tight.
It helps to take a step back and think about the purpose of a protocol and an agenda. Actually, both are intertwined which makes the agenda part of the protocol.
An agenda helps to make the schedule of the event predictable. It enables people to prepare themselves. And depending on the event it is more or less explicit. In a concert with your favorite band, they will not provide you with the order of the songs they’ll play, but you’ll expect some songs, even ask for them, and will expect some favorites to be played as an encore. In contrast, at a concert with classical music, the invitation to the concert will feature whatever music will be played. It helps to choose the concerts you’d like to attend.
The protocol has a different purpose, it is there to organize the circumstances and, in a way, the well-being of those attending. The protocol helps to know who is who in the room, and consequently how to treat one another respectfully. It also assists the people attending the event to know where to be when, or, possibly, to ensure their security. When people come together, everyone has a different role. People need and want to contribute to the event and use their individual roles to locate themselves in the event as described by the protocol.
Going back to the example of a concert, there will be people supporting the event by verifying who can attend and guiding spectators to their place. Others will help the artists find their room backstage, make sure they can be undisturbed, and provide them with whatever they need to prepare themselves before the concert. There will also be someone announcing the artists as well as recognizing people in the room that need to be named or thanked.
In essence, as the examples may also show, there always is a protocol in place. Sometimes it is explicit and detailed, sometimes it’s implicit.
The more implicit it is, the more people expect the event to resemble what they find normal. And normal to us are all the ways of being together we’ve learned to use until then. May these be how family gatherings have been organized, events at school, or any other gathering we’ve experienced since then.
The more explicit a protocol is, the more clarity people will have on how to adapt to the event, but also the more they may find themselves asked to behave differently than they are used to. Which leads to a desire for more guidance in understanding what the event is asking of them. A point of attention is that explicit doesn’t necessarily mean, that people are being told everything they need to do. Explicit can also mean that enough of those present know what is expected and assist anytime someone is confused or doesn’t know what to do. It can also mean that there has been enough information beforehand to help people feel welcomed, and knowledgeable with what they can do and should do.
