Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Peter F. Drucker, influential author of countless books on management, once made a very simple argument: there are reader types, and there are listener types. If you are dealing with a partner you better know which type they are.

It doesn‘t make sense to hand a listener type a manuscript without talking about the subject, and it doesn‘t make sense to set up meetings with a reader type before you hand off the written argument.

We should perhaps just accept that an tolerate each other where our strengths are.

[1] Peter F. Drucker: Managing Oneself. https://www.amazon.com/Managing-Oneself-Harvard-Business-Cla...

Edit: Online: http://academic.udayton.edu/lawrenceulrich/LeaderArticles/Dr...




Whatever people’s preferences in terms of reading or listening, I am inclined to think teams get better results when a high quality meeting summary goes out ahead of time.

I don’t claim this is an absolute truth, but I also don’t think many organizations have given it proper try.


I agree, but think the virtue is as much as in the actual process of writing the summary forces the summoner to clearly work out ahead of time what the meeting is actually about and what it is aiming to achieve.


If you send out a high quality summary you cover the reader types, then during the meeting you cover the listeners.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: