The Manager’s Toolbox: Mastering the Two Types of Meetings

Meetings are a double-edged sword. When done right, they drive progress, build alignment, and solve problems. But too often, they’re seen as inefficient time-wasters, leaving participants frustrated and disengaged. Dr. Ichak Adizes teaches that the key to running effective meetings is recognizing that there are two distinct types of meetings, each with its own purpose, structure, and rules: Problem-Solving meetings and Implementation meetings.

Many managers fail to differentiate between these two types of meetings, leading to confusion and poor outcomes. Understanding the difference is critical for improving productivity and ensuring meetings achieve their intended results.

 1. The Two Types of Meetings: Problem-Solving vs. Implementation

Understanding the difference between Problem-Solving and Implementation meetings begins with recognizing what each meeting is designed to achieve.

Problem-Solving Meetings: Collaborating to Find Solutions

Problem-Solving meetings are used to address complex issues where the solution is not immediately clear. These meetings require input from cross-functional teams — people from different departments who bring diverse perspectives to the table. The goal is to gain alignment on the best solution while fostering the cooperation needed to implement it.

In a Problem-Solving meeting, open dialog and debate are encouraged. The meeting leader facilitates discussions, allowing participants to share knowledge and insights in a bottom-up communication style.

Problem-Solving meetings are necessary when:

     •           The problem or solution is not well-defined.

     •           Cooperation from multiple stakeholders is required to implement the solution.

     •           The issue is complex and requires diverse perspectives.

However, because these meetings involve discussion and debate, they typically take more time than implementation meetings.

Implementation Meetings: Driving Execution and Accountability

Implementation meetings are action-oriented. They are not designed to solve problems or generate new ideas but to communicate and follow up on decisions that have already been made. These meetings focus on top-down communication, where the meeting leader provides instructions, assigns tasks, and ensures accountability.

Unlike Problem-Solving meetings, Implementation meetings are singularly functional — attended by a group of people who report directly to the person leading the meeting. These meetings are typically shorter and more structured, focusing on execution rather than exploration.

Implementation meetings are necessary when:

     •           The solution is already known.

     •           The cooperation of the people who will implement the solution can be counted on.

     •           The focus is on task execution and follow-up.

2. Choosing the Right Meeting for the Situation

To determine which type of meeting is appropriate, managers need to ask two key questions:

        1.      Do I know the solution?

If the solution is unclear, you need a Problem-Solving meeting. If the solution is known, go to question two.

        2.      Can I count on the cooperation of the people involved?

If cooperation is guaranteed, an Implementation meeting will suffice. If you need to gain alignment and buy-in, a Problem-Solving meeting is required.

3. Avoiding Common Meeting Pitfalls

A frequent mistake managers make is using the wrong type of meeting for the situation at hand. This can result in time wasted or poor implementation of decisions. Here’s how to avoid these pitfalls:

When the Wrong Meeting Type Causes Problems:

     •           Problem-Solving Meeting Called Unnecessarily:

If the solution is already clear and everyone is on board, holding a Problem-Solving meeting will waste time and frustrate participants. These meetings are intended for exploration, so using them when no exploration is needed can demotivate attendees.

     •           Implementation Meeting Called Prematurely:

On the flip side, calling an Implementation meeting when a solution isn’t clear or when buy-in is needed can lead to poor execution. People may not fully understand the decision or feel committed to carrying it out, resulting in ineffective implementation.

The key takeaway? Choosing the wrong meeting type can undermine your objectives, either by wasting time or causing misalignment.

4. The Split Strategy: A Practical Solution for Urgent Issues

Sometimes, managers face situations where a Problem-Solving meeting is necessary, but there isn’t enough time to conduct a lengthy discussion. In these cases, the Split Strategy can be a valuable tool.

The Split Strategy involves:

        1.      Arresting the problem with a temporary solution to prevent the issue from worsening. This short-term fix is communicated in an Implementation meeting.

        2.      Once the immediate issue is stabilized, the manager can schedule a Problem-Solving meeting to develop a more comprehensive, long-term solution.

This approach ensures that urgent problems are addressed quickly while still allowing time for deeper problem-solving when necessary. Just note that temporary solutions are often very costly and taxing on the organization.  Thus, one should not allow a temporary solution to remain in effect for a very long time.

5. Conclusion: Meetings as a Strategic Tool

Meetings are an essential tool for managers, but their effectiveness depends on choosing the right type of meeting for the task at hand. Problem-Solving meetings are about collaboration and exploration, while Implementation meetings focus on execution and accountability. Using the wrong type of meeting can waste time, frustrate participants, and hinder results.

By understanding the differences between these two types of meetings — and knowing when to use each — managers can ensure that meetings drive productivity, alignment, and action rather than becoming a dreaded time drain.

Before your next meeting, ask yourself: What type of meeting do I need? The answer will set the stage for more effective leadership and better outcomes.