The corporate meeting is by far the Jedi Blackbelt test of subtle mind tricks and complex equations. For the sake of fair play, I shall describe each of these two mysteries separately, beginning, as all logical people do, with the mathematical arts and, therefore, the complex equation.
One such equation, for example, is that which defines how difficult things are to accomplish in any meeting based upon how many people are in attendance and the weight of their importance. For example, if you had a meeting with two peons, both at the same level, the meeting difficulty would be ascertained by multiplying the total number of attendees by itself. This meeting would therefore be four times as difficult as it has to be. Conversely, if one were to take a meeting with twelve people, three of which were executives, two of which were directors, and one of which was a CEO -- you’d have to multiply each exec by four, each director by three, and the CEO by five. Then you’d have to multiply that total number by itself, square that again, accounting for Pi, and multiply in the integer equivalent of 100 to the 8,000th power for each lawyer in attendance. This would give you an approximate total of 17.5 quadrillion times as difficult -- carry the four. This equation, otherwise known as the Quandary of Anti-Equational Meetings, was of course established by Pythagoras when he was trying to get his famous Theorem approved by the Greek Senate. The Q of A-E M was, ironically, never officially approved for that very same reason.
Moving on to the less logical (read: female) of the two dangers in any meeting: the art of the situational/personal protest. In meetings, it is important to take a stance. This isn’t as easy as merely saying, “I think we should all agree on this matter.” That would naturally destroy the entire equation described above, and the world would not make sense, and we’d fly into space, starting with the cows -- and then we’d have no milk. (I told you this was a primarily female argument!) In one’s stance, one has to be subtle yet firm. There are several ways to do this, which I will list for you. I will do this because I am the Confucius of such knowledge, sans ‘stache, as discussed in my previous column (link).
The Sarcastic Overworked Employee: It is important in this role to be surly. One should maintain crossed arms at all times. When asked in what sort of timeframe one might accomplish a task, an answer should be spouted out that’s at least five to ten years away, if not more. Example: “Hey, Clarissa, when do you think you could have that done by?” “*Heavy Sigh* Oh I don’t know, 2015, I suppose.” There are definite bonus points if you can open your response with a sarcastic remark that makes you seem like you’re on board for the project, such as, “ Oh yeah, that should be no problem at all, I’m sure with all that I have to do I can have it done in no time -- like 2015!”
The Conspiratorial Whisperer: This role is best for those who don’t say much in the meeting and must be done with a partner. One should listen carefully, nodding and smiling accordingly, and then lean over to whisper in long extensive bursts. Bonus points for this maneuver are achieved for making direct eye contact with other members of the meeting who have just spoken as if talking directly about them. Aim for the person you just nodded your head at and seemed to agree with.
The Furious Note-Taker: One should listen to what the current speaker is saying with a look of utter disdain and horror. This should be followed by an intensely angry look and heavy, overly loud scribbling of notes on the agenda for the meeting. Bonus points can be obtained by looking up and glaring at said speaker while muttering incoherently in a Yosemite Sam-esque fashion. This method can be a partner-less alternative to whispering conspiratorially.
There are of course other methods by which one might adamantly disagree with the goings on which include, but are not limited to, the following: burning the agenda, stomping upon the head of the meeting organizer, and overturning chairs while re-enacting the previous night’s <I>WWE Raw</I>. These methods, however effective they may be for getting things done, are also effective at getting one shit-canned, so I personally do not endorse them.
Unless you work for the WWE, in which case, fuck it -- go nuts.
