The Art of Not Saying What Doesn't Need to Be Said

I hate meetings. I hate that time, the time spent consuming itself by people saying useless things to each other.

Why are so many useless things said in meetings?
Also, stories about people saying things they didn't need to say, making others angry, or getting flustered because the atmosphere turned hostile, are everywhere.

Books and know-how on communication skills and listening skills are common these days. But, looking at it from a more fundamental perspective,how can we avoid saying things that don't need to be said in the first place?That is what I have been thinking about lately.

Speak up in meetings

I have seen advice in a book written by a consultant that says,"If you are going to attend a meeting, speak up."The intention behind this advice is likely that since you are being paid for the 30 minutes or hour you spend in the meeting,you should produce results equivalent to that time if you are going to attend.

I don't think this argument is wrong, but it assumes that"speaking up" is a positive contribution to the meeting's results.Even though there are also remarks that have a negative effect.

Specifically, constantly making negative remarks like "That's no good. That one too. No, no, there's no point in doing that" is a negative for the meeting's results.

However, when you are pressured by a boss or senior colleague to "speak up in meetings" as mentioned at the beginning, you might end up saying things,even if they are negative remarks.

This kind of external pressure creates an environment where people say things that don't need to be said.

The urge to express one's own opinion

I am sometimes amazed by a boss who, when I consult them about a problem, ends uptalking endlessly about their own solutions.

Everyone wants toexpress their own opinion.When asked for advice, they tell stories of their own experiences; when prompted at a drinking party, they tell tales of their past glories, drawing the other person into their own arena. When that happens, they end up continuing to talk about things that don't need to be said.

If you ask, "What do you want to do?" the other person would be happy to share their opinion, but once they catch the ball, they don't want to let it go.

How can one say what is necessary without being long-winded?
It is not perfect, but I will organize the things I keep in mind.

Take a step back from the bike-shedding arguments

Parkinson's Law of Triviality exists. It suggests that people tend to obsess over trivial matters, like a bicycle shed, rather than difficult topics, such as the construction of a nuclear power plant.

A common example is discussing things unrelated to the core content, such as "What should we do about the design of this document?" If only internal members are going to read it, anything that is easy to read is fine. It is not something that needs to be debated.

When given the advice to speak up in meetings, it is not desirable for that contribution to be directed toward topics like "should it be red or blue?" You are expected to speak up on more difficult discussions instead.

Therefore, if a discussion about a bicycle shed begins, stay silent. If it is before things heat up, introduce the perspective of "Do we even need to discuss this in the first place?" By doing so, everyone can avoid saying things that don't need to be said. The same applies to small talk or off-topic tangents during meetings. I believe it is important not to start them and not to join in.

Make the other person or the whole group the subject, not yourself.

When you want to express your opinion, the subject is yourself.

For example, when you consult your boss by saying, "I'm struggling with whether to adopt this rule proposed by a member," and you end up stating your own opinion, such as "This rule is meaningless, isn't it?" The person who asked for advice might have known that "the rule itself didn't make much sense. Instead, they valued the fact that a member proposed it and were struggling with how to make it easier for them to propose ideas in the future."

I believe that statements like "I think this" or "How about doing this?" are important. It is precisely because each individual has diverse opinions that new perspectives are born and discussions move in a positive direction. However, that is only if it is requested.

If you had thought about what the other person was looking for, you could have asked back, "What perspective are you struggling with?"

Without grasping the purpose, one should refrain from asserting their own likes and dislikes.

I have written various things, but often, saying things that don't need to be said is just because you want to say them. It might be good to reflect on whether the act of speaking has become a source of pleasure.

If you attend a meeting and everyone is saying things that don't need to be said, it is better to not join in, but rather observe the whole situation and organize the points of discussion. There have been times when, after discussing various things for an hour, I was asked for my opinion at the end, and when I presented it by saying, "Isn't it like this?", the previous opinions were overturned and everyone said, "That's it!" There is no need to get on the same playing field.

Instead, listen carefully to the other person, observe, and then weave the words that are actually needed. This is especially true in business settings.

I said I dislike meetings, but I welcome "meetings that don't contain unnecessary things."