Many groups begin meetings with a "check-in," a round of brief comments by each member on a range of topics, such as how they're feeling, a recent experience, or what they hope to accomplish. Checking in can serve a number of useful purposes:
Disclosure and Emotion Regulation
One version of the process consists primarily (or even solely) of emotional disclosures: "I feel hopeful about this conversation." "I feel upset about something in my personal life." "I feel anxious and distracted." Because talking about feelings enables us to regulate them more effectively [1], even just a brief acknowledgment of our emotional state can allow us to be more present and engaged in the meeting.
Disclosure and Emotional Coherence
Being more transparent about our emotional state also helps avoid misunderstandings related to facial expressions and body language. As author Vickie Gray has noted, "Holding back your feelings doesn’t keep them hidden, it just makes your behavior incoherent." [2] We broadcast our emotions in countless ways, and in the absence of a clear understanding of what we're feeling (and why), it's likely that other people will assume that our behavior represents a response to what's being discussed in the meeting. [3]
Shared Experiences
Another type of check-in involves sharing recent experiences, often with an emphasis not only on things that are going well, but also on challenges and difficulties. This can help people feel more known to each other, particularly if group norms allow the sharing of personal as well as professional experiences. [4] The purpose of this process isn't merely to foster closer relationships, but to cultivate a deeper sense of trust and safety that will be a vital resource when conflicts occur. [5] In this version of the process it's often advisable to set a time limit for each individual contribution to prevent the check-in from being so lengthy that it detracts from the meeting's utility. [6]
Group Participation
And checking in typically ensures that everyone speaks at least once before the group begins to address the meeting's tactical agenda. This can be especially useful in virtual meetings, which sometimes contribute to an "audience effect," making people reluctant to speak up and contribute if they've been quiet for any length of time. It's preferable to allow people to pass or simply say, "I'm in," rather than compel them to speak further, although someone who consistently elects not to share will initially invite curiosity and may eventually create a sense of distrust.
LISTENING
But one further purpose served by this process isn't about the speaker who's checking in but about all the other members of the group: the listeners. At any given moment during a check-in, it's easy to think of the speaker as the focal point of the process, but this misses what's happening in the group as a whole. The vast majority of the group's collective energy during a check-in isn't devoted to speaking--it's devoted to listening.
With this in mind, we can see that checking in not only gives everyone a chance to speak, but it also--and perhaps more importantly--compels everyone to listen right from the start. This heightens the group's commitment to be fully present and sets a tone for the meeting that can make subsequent discussions less frenetic and more productive. As group dynamics experts Jim and Michelle McCarthy have noted, "Your degree of presence correlates with your degree of efficiency." [7]
Footnotes
[1] Talking About Feelings
[2] We're Leaky (Emotional Signals and Cognitive Dissonance)
[3] Seeing What's Not There (The Importance of Missing Data)
[4] Five Levels of Communication
[5] Safety Is a Resource, Not a Destination
[6] One person should be designated as the timekeeper, and that responsibility should rotate and be shared equitably. Avoid using a harsh or abrupt tone for the timer. I've used the sound of this Tibetan bowl for many years:
[7] Software for Your Head: Core Protocols for Creating and Maintaining Shared Vision, page 21 (Jim and Michelle McCarthy, 2001, available online and in hard copy.)
Adapted from a previous post written after I joined the first in-house coaching staff at the Stanford Graduate School of Business in 2007.
Appendix: Check-In from the Core Protocols
One model of the check-in process can be found in Jim and Michele McCarthy's Core Protocols, a set of guidelines initially developed in the 1990s to help teams of software developers operate more effectively:
Check In
Use Check In to begin meetings or anytime an individual or group Check In would add more value to the current team interactions.
Steps
Speaker says "I feel [one or more of MAD, SAD, GLAD, AFRAID]." Speaker may provide a brief explanation. Or if others have already checked in, the speaker may say "I pass." Speaker says "I'm in." This signifies that Speaker intends to behave according to the Core Commitments. Listeners respond, "Welcome."
Commitments
State feelings without qualification. State feelings only as they pertain to yourself. Be silent during another's Check In.
Do not refer to another's Check In disclosures without explicitly granted permission from him or her.Notes
In the context of the Core Protocols, all emotions are expressed through combinations of MAD, SAD, GLAD, or AFRAID. For example, "excited" may be a combination of GLAD and AFRAID. Check In as deeply as possible. Checking in with two or more emotions is the norm. The depth of a group's Check In translates directly to the quality of the group's results. Do not do anything to diminish your emotional state. Do not describe yourself as a "little" mad, sad, glad, or afraid or say "I'm mad, but I'm still glad." Except in large groups, if more than one person checks in, it is recommended that all do so. HAPPY may be substituted for GLAD, and SCARED may be substituted for AFRAID.
More on the Core Protocols can be found in Jim and Michelle McCarthy's Software for Your Head: Core Protocols for Creating and Maintaining Shared Vision (2001), available online and in hard copy.
Photo by mbpogue.
