When it comes to building practical business qualifications, you’ll nearly always find me on the side of building an experience over long formal training programs. There’s a lot you just can’t learn in a classroom. The best training programs offer you a way to learn and build experiences together or provide new context for your already powerful career experiences. As adults, we’re looking to have immediate benefits from learning something new. We need to apply what we learned, experiment, and make it our own.
Earlier this year, a reader question came in and I’ve just been waiting to have the nerve to respond to it publicly. To me this showcases a scenario in which knowledge-for-knowledge sake trumps practical experience.
Reader question:
I’d like to get your help on a test question. I had a disagreement over my professor about it and I’m looking for a second opinion.
The test question:
The primary purpose of a _____________ meeting is to identify and resolve problems. (Points: 5) 5%
A) status review
B) problem-solving
C) technical design review
D) communications flow
The instructor is a PM and former Programmer with over 20 languages under his belt claims based on his experience the answer is B; however, I assert that the question is invalid based on the material presented in the text and my limited experience; hence, A or B is only half right.
The text defines a Status Meeting as:
Status review meetings are to inform, identify problems and establish action items.
The text defines Problem Solving as:
Problem-solving meetings should be used when a problem or potential problem has been identified the steps are: to develop a problem statement, identify potential causes, gather data, identify and evaluate possible solutions, determine the best solution, revise the plan, implement the solution and evaluate it.
The premise for my argument was the definitions in the text and how can the programmers determine if the business views the issue as a problem. My argument below was written weeks ago before I conceded that I was wrong. I think I could be going overboard but I also think that if businesses practiced in this manner they could be wasting time and money.
Also, based on my limited experience I believe the status meeting would be most likely attended by stakeholders & business users. Whereas the problem-solving meeting would be mostly project management and programmers.
Laura’s response:
(And know, I do not know the instructor or the training program, nor did I care to ask.)
Apologies for my delay in getting back to you. I read your question a few times and was a bit surprised about how the Q&A process works for these types of courses. I would say that technically speaking you seem to be correct, but that practically speaking it’s much more important that you know how to run a good meeting that keeps just the right people involved in the right types of conversations, i.e is productive and doesn’t waste anyone’s time. Sometimes you might need stakeholders involved in problem-solving, especially if you need a quick decision or feedback on priorities.
Laura
Upon further review, Laura says:
If you find yourself in the same situation as this reader, it’s probably best to worry less about being 100% correct than it is to take what you can from the class and move on. This is purely semantics. If you’ve learned enough to wade through this material and make an informed answer, you’ve learned enough to start practicing running a meeting. Your real-world experience will teach you that status meetings turn into problem-solving meetings all the time. Sometimes they are designed that way — with good reason we throw out the book. Other times talkative stakeholders make it that way and we need to learn how to politely interrupt and get the conversation back on track.
The challenge is not in knowing the difference. The challenge is in knowing when to let some problem-solving happen and when to redirect the conversation to the original agenda. This is where the art and science of business analysis and meeting management meet.
And, as an instructor, if you happen to be reading, I hope there is a way to acknowledge a well-meaning student who has obviously consumed the material you’ve given and is hungry for more. I am sure, like me, you’ve had meetings that blurred these definitions. Are you preparing your students for the real world or only to pass a test?
|
By Laura Brandenburg. Laura Brandenburg is passionate about business analysis. She's found her niche helping aspiring business analysts find transferable skills and position themselves in the BA job market. To stay up-to-date on the latest from Bridging the Gap be sure to sign-up for our free email course and weekly eNewsletter. View more blog posts by Laura Brandenburg |
Related posts:
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
While I do get the point of this… and “refusing to accept the premise of the question” (one of my favorites) seems like a clear winner… there are a few more angles…
I cringe when I hear that the results of standardized tests are improving… Again – I get it… but do we want people to be more standard? I know that is overstated… However we still do have to ask how to we measure ourselves, our organization, our kids, our teams…
Somewhere there has to be a baseline. Many certifications offer that, IIBA, PMI, Scrum Alliance, ABPMP, etc. It is a baseline however. People need a combination of experience, courses, tests, recommendations – depending on the certification. While it is not perfect, it is a way to determine if people know the body of knowledge, take the time to actually prepare and take the exam, and ideally, through continuing education stay connected with the field of study.
Is this perfect? Certainly not! It is far from it! But I can tell you this… if I have the option of interviewing a CBAP vs non CBAP I will start with THE CBAP to fill a position. I will have a lot of questions for them to prove that they can do the job OF COURSE!
The question in the email seems a bit silly and if the teacher did not revise and give credit for A, file a grievance. Perhaps the instructor meant ” identify solutions and solve problems”. Either way it is poorly worded.
There are courses focused on learning – that use a case study and have student’s actually work through the case study that allows them to practice skills individually and in teams. There are also more lecture based courses, prep courses, etc.
What if I refuse to accept the premise… and say I can pass and test AND run a meeting?
Thanks for your comment Jake. I certainly did not mean to throw all training into the same boat in calling out this example. Yes, real learning does happen because of the combination of great instructors, well-designed course material, and motivated students.
I just get so frustrated with questions like these because there doesn’t seem to be any good answer. It calls me back to the days in my advanced US history course — I received the only C in my high school career but earned a 5/5 on the test at the end. (In most cases a 3/5 was good enough for college credit and 5/5 were rare. I think this was the only one I received out of all the tests I took.) What I took away from this experience is that measures and tests can be rather arbitrary ways to capture my own success. It’s up to me to own the measures and own the results.
Just like you said: “However we still do have to ask how to we measure ourselves, our organization, our kids, our teams…” Exactly. The measures must mean something. Answering the question right or wrong must mean something more than just a passing grade, right? Because at the end of the day it’s not about passing the test, it’s about having the knowledge you need to run a productive meeting. And, I think, this is the whole point I was driving at, albeit rather sideways.
Reading questions like this sort of make my head spin. The knowledge gained seems fairly arbitrary. It’s as if there was one “best way” to break up meetings when my practical experience tells me the hard and fast rules are made to be broken. Sure I can benefit from understanding the difference between updating status and problem solving and maybe in a future meeting I’ll use this knowledge to help segment my conversations. But this is rather small stuff when it comes to actually running a meeting….And to waste time splitting hairs over definitions or even researching what it takes to file a grievance when there is so much to be experienced and learned! There is me sitting back in that US History class refusing to do the busywork but taking away enough knowledge to ace the test…
Yes, you can pass a test AND run a meeting. I think you’ve proved that hands down. I’m almost tempted to revisit the title!