The theory & reality of town halls

On a recent trip to Vermont Michael and I were listening to the Vermont Public Radio president on a town hall with their listeners.  And I noticed something.  It just didn’t work.  The president listened and chatted with those that called in.  The conversation seemed more like ‘she says’/’he says’ than a real conversation.  And, at the end of the show the president closed nicely and I realized she hadn’t specifically responded with an action to a single listener’s feedback.

It seemed a far cry from Obama’s town halls. Or what I’ve heard from my friends who live in Vermont, a state that may have invented the town hall, about the meetings that their very small town, Newfane, runs regularly to discuss all matter of issues and opportunities facing the community.  Or my recent experience attending a town hall for a  “programme particulier d’urbanisme” that has the potential to change the face of downtown Montreal.  These are lively discussions.  Both the politicians and the electorate care about the issues being discussed.  And at their best there’s clear action to be taken at the end.

And yet, the Vermont Public Radio town hall seems a familiar scenario for those of us doing internal communications.  So what’s going on?

Employee town halls after all are supposed to humanize organizations.  They create one of the few opportunities for interaction and discussion between our executives, managers and employees.   So, why don’t they generate meaningful discussion?  Why aren’t they more lively?  Gosh why don’t we even get questions, unless we plant them [manipulation – for another blog] more than half the time?  Why does it seem more like a shareholder meeting rather than a scrum?

Here are some thoughts:

Political town halls	Employee town halls
It’s a democracy	It’s not a democracy
Audience has the power	Speaker has the power
Politicians to listen and defend their position	Executives to talk and assert their position
There’s something to discuss that people care and want to discuss	There may or may not be anything to discuss and employees are ‘mandated’ to participate
There’s an opportunity to influence decisions	Little or no real opportunity to influence;  decisions have already been taken or

Given these differences, what can we learn?  Can we re-frame the Corporate town hall to achieve our goals of humanizing, engaging and creating meaningful conversations that further the business?  Love to hear what you think.

Tags: Communications, Employee communication, Engagement, Humanizing, Relationship