Stay up thus far with free updates
Simply log in Artificial intelligence myFT Digest – delivered straight to your inbox.
When different generations of colleagues come together to debate ideas and make decisions, there is normally no shortage of potential for conflict.
But Generation Z, the Millennials, the generation are all sure about one thing
In Research My colleague Daniel Jolles and I surveyed greater than 3,400 professionals about their experiences with meetings for the Inclusion Initiative on the London School of Economics. They found that 35 percent of meetings were unproductive – a finding that was consistent across all age groups.
Respondents felt that the loudest voices spoke for too long and with little substance. Our research found that individuals from Generation X – now of their 40s and 50s – spoke probably the most; Gen Z – the youngest cohort within the workplace, of their 20s – the smallest. In three quarters of the meetings, the voice of Generation Z was not heard in any respect. And as older people proceed talking, they create a “cascade” that drowns out the contributions of younger colleagues.
Such intergenerational tensions usually are not just an issue for young staff' self-esteem. Our research found that the annual cost of unproductive meetings in wasted hours within the U.S. may very well be about $259 billion – that's about $9.6 million for an organization with 2,500 employees. When meetings are dominated by the generation that speaks the loudest, it could cause corporations to miss out on ideas and recent perspectives.
So what can corporations do to comprehend the potential of group meetings? By following just a few key mantras and harnessing the facility of artificial intelligence, they will break through ingrained power dynamics and habits of not listening and produce out the very best in everyone within the room.
We found that to be truly inclusive, leaders must take three approaches. They should show that contributions are valued. You should use everyone's ideas. And finally, they needs to be open to recent perspectives.
That's easier said than done. AI may also help by making a number of the bad habits we bring into meetings clearer. Natural language processing tools, for instance, can flag when certain voices are dominant and alert the session leader to problematic dynamics, including the overrepresentation of a generation or group.
Tools are being developed to present us a nudge during a gathering, telling us, for instance, that one person has dominated the discussion for the last 10 minutes. At the moment they’re more often allowing the chairman to ask an AI companion who has spoken probably the most.
AI transcriptions help be certain that quieter (or younger) voices are recorded and reflected upon later. The same applies to posts within the chat function for many who don’t feel secure in person.
And while no technology can force us to listen, AI could make us more aware of the tendency to prioritize our own voice.
By summarizing contributions during a gathering, AI tools like Fathom AI's Meeting Assistant or Grain can encourage participants to think and only deal with speaking once they have something to say – in any case, who wants to listen to? how his mediocre perspective is repeated to him? Generative AI can even suggest follow-up inquiries to delve deeper, enabling higher quality discussions and inspiring quieter voices to expand on their ideas.
This may very well be higher for all of us if meetings transition from “technical discussions” to strategic forums where ideas are exchanged and refined.
Inclusive meetings where everyone feels included, no matter generation, are linked to higher worker performance. According to our research, executives who said their last essential meeting was comprehensive were more prone to report higher financial performance for his or her company. Even more striking, 86 percent of employees who said the identical were satisfied with their jobs, in comparison with 56 percent who experienced non-inclusive meetings.
Fortunately, our research suggests that meetings where everyone seems to be encouraged to speak are only so long as another.
These are the beginnings of giving AI a seat on the table. I encourage anyone leading a gathering to experiment and find what works for them.
But if AI delivers on its promise, it could develop into one of the vital valued voices in meeting rooms. After all, the strongest voice shouldn’t be necessarily the loudest; more often, it’s the one which best transforms collective intelligence into actionable insights.
