One of the Chair's worst nightmares is the "closet parliamentarian": An individual who knows rules of order (or claims to know them) and insists on things being done "by the book", with motions and amendments handled with "scientific precision". Excessive formality serves no useful purpose and often has a constraining and stifling effect. The vast majority of the group could do without it, but doesn't know how to combat procedural obsession. This situation amounts to "the tyranny of the minority", since a small group forces the majority to be more formal than it wants to. A common sense approach is needed to combat this dysfunction and give the "silent majority" its power back.

One way of combating procedural obsession is by asking the group to establish, by a majority vote, the level of formality that it wants in its meetings. An analogy to consider is travel on a cruise ship, where the dress code for dinner may be "informal", "semi-formal" or "formal". Similarly, your group could opt to have informal, semi-formal, or formal meetings.

The informal approach would be appropriate for staff and committee meetings, where no motions are made and decisions are reached by consensus. The semi-formal approach would be appropriate for boards and councils, or for large annual meetings of societies, unions and public companies, where formality provides the necessary structure for the meeting. The full-fledged formal approach would likely be appropriate for meetings of legislative bodies or professional parliamentarians (If you go to one, you may discover that procedural accuracy does not guarantee efficiency and quality outcomes).

At the start of its work, your group could choose its procedural code. Suppose your board votes to opt for the "semi-formal" code. Subsequently, a new member (being a former member of parliament) introduces greater formality and obscure motions like "I call for the order of the day" or "I rise to a question of privilege". He or she would be advised of the selected code and the group would get back on track. In short, the code and the level of formality would be determined by the group collectively (democracy) and not by outspoken individuals (anarchy).

Note: The above material is drawn from "The Business Meetings Sourcebook: A Practical Guide to Better Meetings and Shared Decision Making". For details on the book and ordering information visit http://www.elimina.com/books.