Today’s Strategic Alignment Journal post in two sentences:

Organizations can conduct increasingly effective meetings while continuing to discuss the same unresolved problems, introducing corrective actions without adequately understanding why previous efforts have failed. The Fix Forward Session™ changes the conversation from repeatedly managing recurring issues to understanding what keeps them in place before determining what needs to change.

---

How often have you attended a meeting where the same problems are being discussed, the same concerns raised and another set of actions agreed upon, only to find yourselves having essentially the same conversation a week or a month later?

The meeting itself may have been well organized, with a clear agenda, the right people in attendance and everyone contributing. Responsibilities were assigned and by conventional standards, it could be considered a productive meeting.

Didn’t we discuss this problem already?

There’s no shortage of advice on conducting effective meetings, and much of it is sensible. But improving how meetings are conducted doesn’t necessarily improve the organization’s ability to resolve the problems being discussed.

When the Same Issues Keep Returning

In many organizations, recurring meetings are an accepted part of how work gets done. Teams meet weekly to review performance, discuss operational challenges, address customer concerns and monitor progress against agreed objectives.

These meetings serve an important purpose. They facilitate communication, provide opportunities to make decisions and help people coordinate their efforts. But what happens when the same issues continue appearing on the agenda, despite repeated discussions and agreed actions?

A sales team may regularly raise concerns about delays in responding to customer requests. Management discusses the problem, identifies actions and assigns responsibility.

The following week, the delays continue.

Another discussion takes place. Another set of actions is agreed upon. A new reporting procedure may be introduced, or someone is asked to monitor response times more closely.

Yet the problem persists.

At some point, shouldn’t the conversation change?

Rather than continuing to ask what needs to be done about the delays, shouldn’t we be asking why the organization has been unable to resolve them?

The explanation may have little to do with the individuals responsible for responding to customers. There may be competing departmental priorities, unclear decision-making authority, inadequate resources or processes that make timely responses difficult.

Unless these conditions are understood, the organization may continue introducing actions that address the symptoms without resolving what is causing them.

When Meetings Become a Substitute for Resolution

Sometimes organizations use meetings to compensate for problems in the way they are structured and managed.

Unclear responsibilities generate meetings to determine who should do what. Poor communication between departments creates the need for regular coordination meetings. Decision-making bottlenecks result in matters being repeatedly referred to management for approval.

Over time, these meetings become established routines. People become accustomed to discussing the same difficulties, reviewing outstanding commitments and agreeing on another course of action.

The meeting itself becomes part of how the organization manages the problem, even though the problem remains unresolved.

The organization becomes increasingly effective at discussing and managing issues that it has yet to understand sufficiently to resolve.

And because everyone is participating, reporting and following up, there is a sense that something is being accomplished. Note: continued activity should not be confused with progress.

Introducing the Fix Forward Session

What if, instead of adding the same problem to another meeting agenda, the organization deliberately changed the purpose of the conversation?

Where I see a value add, is what I’m calling a Fix Forward Session.

Rather than gathering people to discuss another set of corrective actions, the session would concentrate on understanding why the problem keeps returning.

The starting point would be to establish what is actually happening, what has already been attempted and what the results of those efforts reveal.

It would require examining the problem from the perspectives of the people experiencing it, those responsible for managing it and those affected by its consequences. Importantly, the conversation would also examine the organization’s own contribution to the situation.

• Are existing processes making the problem more difficult to resolve?
• Are employees being held accountable for outcomes they don’t have sufficient authority to influence?
• Are different departments working toward priorities that conflict with one another?

The objective would not be to find someone to blame or produce another action list. It would be to develop a shared understanding of what is keeping the problem in place before deciding what needs to change.

That understanding could reveal that previous solutions were addressing the wrong problem, that implementation had been undermined by organizational conditions or that an intervention had unintentionally created additional difficulties.

Only then would the conversation turn toward determining an appropriate response, identifying who needs to be involved and establishing how progress will be assessed.

Changing the Conversation Changes the Possibilities

A Fix Forward Session would not necessarily require more time than the meetings an organization is already holding. It would require a different use of that time.

Instead of repeatedly reviewing what hasn’t been accomplished, participants would examine why previous commitments haven’t produced the intended results.

Instead of assuming another intervention is necessary, they would establish whether the existing approach needs to be changed, better supported or reconsidered entirely.

And rather than measuring success by the number of actions agreed upon, the organization would assess whether those actions are addressing the conditions responsible for the recurring problem.

Of course, some problems are complex and cannot be resolved through a single conversation. Additional investigation, difficult decisions and sustained implementation may be required. But even then, a better understanding of the problem provides a more reliable basis for deciding what happens next.

The purpose of meetings should extend beyond facilitating discussion and assigning responsibilities. They should contribute to the organization’s ability to understand situations, make informed decisions and achieve meaningful outcomes.

Sometimes, making progress requires more than improving the meeting. It requires changing the conversation we’ve been having about the problem.

Strategic Reflection Prompt

What recurring problem in your organization continues to occupy meeting agendas, and what might change if the next conversation focused on understanding why previous attempts to resolve it haven’t worked?

I’m Giselle Hudson, The Pre-Fixer™.

For nearly three decades, I’ve worked with business owners and leaders across the Caribbean who carry important decisions largely on their own, often when problems keep returning, solutions fall short, or implementation stalls.

When I ask business owners what problem they can’t seem to solve, the answer is usually “people.” So I ask them to tell me more, because people and businesses are rarely as simple as they first appear.

I help them understand what’s really causing the problem before they spend more trying to fix it. And where needed, I help design the solution and guide their teams to put it into practice.

Get Clarity before the Fix.

What are you trying to make sense of right now?