The Uncomfortable Truth About Meetings, Papers, and Communication: Finding the Balance Between Documentation and Dialogue
In an ideal world, meetings would be a culmination of preparation. Papers circulated in advance would have been read, reflected upon, and digested. Participants would arrive with clarity on the issues, informed viewpoints, and perhaps even pre-emptive conversations already held. Decisions would be swift, discussions would be strategic, and the meeting would be a forum for insight rather than information transfer.
But the reality is very different.
Many people do read papers ahead of time—carefully, thoughtfully, and with a genuine commitment to governance. Others skim. Some arrive having browsed only the agenda. And a not-insignificant number walk into meetings asking:
“So… what are we here to talk about?”
This is frustrating, but it is also the truth of organisational life. People are busy. Attention is scattered. Teams are overloaded. And the capacity to process written information varies dramatically across roles, work styles, and cognitive preferences.
So the challenge for anyone managing governance meetings—programme boards, oversight groups, steering committees—is this:
How do you maintain rigorous documentation and robust assurance, while also recognising that many people rely on succinct oral summaries to engage meaningfully in discussion?
It is not an either–or. It is a careful balancing act.
1. The Case for Circulating Papers in Advance
Circulating documents before a meeting is not a courtesy; it is good governance.
It allows people to:
Read and reflect at their own pace
Spot risks early
Raise clarifications privately
Avoid surprises in the meeting itself
Arrive prepared to discuss rather than absorb information
When done well, it also reduces the meeting length because the meeting becomes about decision-making, not information dissemination.
However—and here lies the friction—even when papers are circulated early, not everyone reads them.
Which leads us to the second uncomfortable truth.
2. The Reality: Not Everyone Engages with Written Papers
People have different working styles. Some prefer reading deeply. Others learn best by hearing. Some are overwhelmed by volume. Others operate in environments where reading packs in advance simply isn’t feasible.
It can be irritating for those who prepare meticulously, but it is a reality.
And insisting that everyone must read everything is not a strategy—it’s a wish.
Effective governance requires meeting people where they are, not where we wish they would be.
3. The Meeting Still Matters—Because Governance Lives in Conversation
Even if documents are read in advance, meetings serve a crucial purpose:
They create alignment
They generate commitment
They enable live challenge and assurance
They document formal approval or endorsement
They allow real-time sense-making—something papers alone cannot achieve
In fact, governance is rarely achieved through email threads and asynchronous commentary.
Governance happens when people come together, hear each other, and agree.
A well-run meeting is a unifying moment.
A poorly-run meeting is a waste of everyone’s time.
4. The Tension: Depth vs. Brevity
The challenge is this:
> How do you honour the thoroughness of written documentation while serving the reality that many participants depend on short, clear verbal summaries?
If we rely solely on written papers, some participants will be lost.
If we rely solely on verbal updates, governance becomes vague and undocumented.
The solution is to embrace a dual mode:
Written materials for rigour.
Verbal clarity for engagement.
A skilled chair or programme lead must bridge the two.
5. Getting the Balance Right: Practical Tips & Best Practice
A. Make Papers Useful (Not Just Lengthy)
Use clear headings, summaries, and decision lines at the top.
Include a one-page “Board-Ready Summary” for rapid orientation.
Frame content around options, risks, and recommendations, not narrative updates.
B. Circulate Papers Early—And Flag What Matters
People read more when:
they know which pages truly matter,
the email clearly states what decisions are required,
and the pack is not bloated.
C. Start Every Meeting with a 60–90 Second Overview
This is critical for anchoring attention:
What this meeting is about
What decisions are needed
What has changed since the last meeting
What’s at risk if decisions are delayed
Think of it as the executive trailer for the meeting.
D. Use the Meeting for Conversation, Not Reading
Avoid the trap of walking through every page.
People didn’t attend the meeting to watch someone read PowerPoint.
Focus on:
agreement
challenge
risk
assurance
forward direction
If people need paragraphs, they can read paragraphs.
E. Encourage Pre-Meeting Queries
This reduces derailments and surprises.
It allows thorny issues to be resolved offline and keeps the meeting strategic.
F. Document Decisions Clearly
At the end of each agenda item:
Confirm the decision
Confirm the rationale
Confirm who is responsible
Confirm next steps
Meeting papers matter, but meeting minutes are governance.
G. Respect People’s Different Working Styles
Some leaders are detail-oriented.
Others are conceptual.
Some read deeply.
Some skim.
Some only connect during the live conversation.
Designing for all four increases alignment and reduces rework afterwards.
6. The Art of Governance Lies in Integration
The truth is that:
Documents create clarity.
Meetings create commitment.
Conversation creates understanding.
Consensus creates momentum.
Good programme governance does not rely on one communication mode.
It relies on the integration of the written word with the spoken word, and on the skill of leaders to translate complexity into clarity.
When we accept that not everyone will read the papers—and plan accordingly—we stop being frustrated and start becoming more effective.
The goal isn’t to get everyone to read everything.
The goal is to ensure everyone:
understands what matters,
agrees on what’s next,
and leaves the meeting aligned and accountable.
That is the heart of good governance.