I saw this on another forum and I'll repeat my comment from there.

Anyone who talks like this: "As David explained, "Having weekly family meetings increased communication, improved productivity, lowered stress and made everyone much happier to be part of the family team."" - I automatically side-eye.

A lot of this makes a lot of sense. One of the most common child refrains is "you don't let me do anything" or "I never get to choose" and this business model addresses both of those issues by giving kids a seat at the table that carries a vote, more a participant than guest. I see a lot that can apply to childless families too, like checking in with each other daily and taking a quick look at how you are each day.

Why do you side-eye that? It's a very normal sentence. You don't use words like "communication" and "productivity"? I do, all the time. He's not talking to children; he's talking to adults, and about a business process that he understands at a different level than his children. The words he's using isn't complex or overly difficult to understand.

This sounds really interesting. With an only child who is approaching adolescence this might be a way to keep communication open. Anything to reduce early morning stress sessions as well is definitely worth a try.

I haven't read the linked article yet - I will - but in this article (on AT) it seems that "top-down managment" is being mentioned as something in opposition to things like flexibility, allowing kids choices, ongoing communication, measurable goals, prioritizing. I think you could call how my family runs as top down management, and yet the members of my family do communicate all the time. We adults display a lot of flexibility each day as we deal with what is actually reality (we were behind schedule for leaving for school) as opposed to what the ideal was (everyone doing everything in a timely fashion, leaving on time). Our kids have manageble goals (as far as I can tell) and they get to make their own choices (pick out clothes for school from a limited mix-and-match selection, make your own choice of sandwich for lunch). Maybe this false dichotomy is not made in the linked article, but I wish it also weren't being made here.

I will confess that I don't know what "iterative process" means and it sounds so foreign to me I'm immediately biased against it as some sort of corporate-speak nonsense phrase used to say nothing while sounding like you are saying something. :)

Okay, I read the linked article and apparently I'm MUCH MUCH less old fashioned than I thought. The picture of top-down management described in the WSJ article sounds like hell on earth and I am having trouble accepting that any families are run that way. I mean, I can believe I guess, but it's surprising. Does anyone who actually desires to be a good parent not bother to communicate their values and the associated whys to their kids? Do they actually set goals and expectations for the kids or family as a whole with no understanding of what is achieveable or how much/what kind of effort goes into meeting those goals? It sounds more like bad parents who have never bothered to learn about child development (like, at all) or healthy family dynamics. Would people who choose to remain ignorant and assume they are right about everything be the kind of people who are reading the WSJ article anyway?

And I still don't know what "iterative process" means - I didn't see it in the article. Guess I'll have to google it. :)

One big difference - you can't fire your kids.

"Iterative process" means that though you have a method, you evaluate it as you go and anticipate you will need to make changes. Instead of putting together a complete plan ahead of time, you most likely have a framework to go by and make changes as you discover flaws in your model. I encounter this issue all the time in my work. People have a great idea of how they're going to do something, but never take into account all of the problems and questions they'll encounter on the way and can't make changes on the fly.

I think a lot of it comes from communication burnout. Parents know that sometimes it's impossible to talk with kids about anything or negotiate or get them to understand reason - they're children, and not fully formed adults, after all. So a lot of them just go with a "Do as I say" approach because they just need to get things done in so little time. This means there isn't as much of a two-way street and it's more like a boss handing an employee a set of tasks that must be completed. It's not involving kids in understanding how you do things like manage money, because the communication burnout means you just can't deal with talking to your kids at a speed they understand or dealing with a thousand questions, because you just need to get the bills paid and move onto the next task.

denisegk, iterative is the new 'in crowd' word, might as well get used it it and practice letting it roll of your tongue. I get Success magazine every month just to listen to the cd that is enclosed and this month 'iterative' must have been mentioned 30 or 40 times. I'm already sick of it.

but the definition goes like this:

*iteration (N)
*iterative (adj)

These words have a strong association with mathematics and computers. An "iteration" is like a step, an application of a formula or something. "We went through 15 iterations before we were satisfied."

*reiterate (V)

It's a verb, and it means "to say something again (for emphasis)"
"She reiterated to me how important it is to pay attention while driving."

Let me reiterate: I'm sick of this word no matter how many times it goes through iteration.

It's kind of overused, like synergy. I once heard synergy used about 10 times during one presentation. My definition of an interative process is different than yours, obviously. Yours is more accurate, while mine is more along the lines of what I'm used to when people talk about iterative processes. There's a built in assumption that every process has flaws and we have to be aware of them and make changes as we go.

I'll be sharing this w/my hubby to see what we can incorporate into our own family. Our kids are 4 and 5, so now would be a good time to get started.

I won't be putting this into practice since my cat is hopeless at chores. My reaction is that this could work - having witnessed and been subject to many approaches to parenting and having read pretty widely on the subject and having been a step-parent, I don't think that there's much that can get screwed up. Good luck all you breeders - the world is counting on you.

Each day is an iterative process - just saying.

Thanks Pi. You know, I think I was forgetting that I have a very different life than many people. Because I have a delicate constitution (to use a Lady Violet Crawley term) when it comes to mental health, my life and thus my family's life is very constrained. None of us are overcommitted or over-scheduled or running all over the city every day. I would lose my mind. We actually have a lot of quiet down time. But you've reminded me that for many folks "over-" is normal and possibly inescapable, and no doubt they *are* burned out and just trying to get things done to survive day to day.

I see your comments here all time, and I've been curious for a while: what do you do?

My family actually did this. "Meetings" were dreaded times for me, and frequently gave me panic attacks. I don't recommend this, it feels so inhuman.

I read that article in the WSJ (on paper!) and scoffed at first. Then I read it again and wound up clipping it for future reference. One more tool in the parental toolbox can't hurt, but every person and every family is so different and there are no easy answers!

Pi, the reason is was so overused on this month's Success cd is because several of the interviewees were suggesting that 'iterating' become part of our daily process. Small changes to improve our lives every day is what they were suggesting. I'm just a plain talk kind of person and thought why not just say that.

It's a good idea after all.

I think the article would go down much easier for some if they didn't apply the business metaphor. That said, it's a WSJ article which targets business-people, so it makes it easier for their target audience to process. I'm pretty sure you can take the same advice, change the jargon, and make it more appropriate for a different audience.

I was a consultant for a while (no longer), but used to avoid words like iterative or synergy -- not because they weren't useful, but because they put clients off. That said, I learned later that other words (or phrases) that I used were very consultant-y like: "touch base," and "reach out." [Although I blame that on AT&T/Bell "Reach out and touch someone" ads...]

C'mon, you really think the objection is to "big words"? Hardly. It's the same reaction I'd have to any business who refers to their employees as "team members", which IME is a red flag. Because family isn't a business and doesn't need "branding", and to be honest a lot of these ideas he's pushing as brilliant new strategies only employed in the business world aren't actually anything terribly new when it comes to families - they didn't invent chore checklists and family meetings.

I also don't agree that this is in any way a typical family in the US. Stay-at-home mothers are now the exception rather than the norm (and have always been an upper and middle-class phenomenon anyway), so I feel like the audience for this sort of family management is smaller than he thinks.

I grew up in a large family and we had family meetings like this frequently. We also had one-on-one meetings with our parents where we set monthly goals in various areas and discussed the failure/success/progress of the previous month's goals. We always had chores, we had relative freedom with how to spend the money we earned, etc. I don't think this idea is revolutionary or new, but I think when it's done the right way could be incredibly helpful for both the parents and the children.

I love this. Thank you for the link.

I do agree with others that nothing in practice seems much different than anything that's been done for generations - it's just using terms familiar to parents in the corporate world and framed in models vetted in the business world. So much of it pings true when I think of what has worked well in my family (vote-first think-later family meetings to decide vacations, pulling everyone in to make decisions regarding funeral arrangements or long-term care, having the quarreling children come up with their own resolution, etc).

It seems that a lot of the things that make a healthy family make a productive business. Could it be that business looked at how families operated first?

I was happy to see this article in circulation because it basically describes "positive discipline," a non-punitive form of discipline, which emphasizes the importance of communication, encouraging kids to problem solve, and family meetings. My kids are only 1 & 3, but we are in the practice of having a weekly family meeting. It is empowering for our 3 year old to be able to have his "joys" and "concerns" heard, as well as work on problem solving. (Most of his concerns are over his 1 year old brother: taking his toys, etc.)

It's all a matter of how you actually implement something like this. We practice a modified version of the business model at our home and it works really well. My husband and I set aside time each week (same time and day, so we can schedule around it if needed) to have our "family meetings." We use this time to discuss upcoming major expenditures (e.g. how to budget for the new furnace we expect we'll need by next year; how we're doing with saving up for our next vacation), plan meals for the coming week, look at the calendar to remind ourselves if we have any get-togethers coming up with family or friends, etc. Our kids will participate when they are older (they're 1 and 2 now).

Our days are so full with work, kids, and just living life that it's sometimes hard to focus on the big picture. It's been so helpful to have this dedicated time to evaluate our current situation, and make plans for the future.

I find this iteration of the family/business model utterly ridiculous at best & bordering asinine at worst. Certainly the underlying precepts are sound whatever the family constitution. (<lol)

That said, and being theses familes focus on priorities, I see no mention of the binding agents which should be the first priority...love and respect. Really, folks. I don't see what all the stir is about. This model has been successfully excuted for eons. Us common folk call it plain ole' common sense coupled with good parenting.

@ ScuttledCuttle: I don't just side-eye folks who talk like this. I run, not walk, in the opposite direction at the first mention of a buzzword.

I find this iteration of the family/business model utterly ridiculous at best & bordering asinine at worst. Certainly the underlying precepts are sound whatever the family constitution. (<lol)

That said, and being theses familes focus on priorities, I see no mention of the binding agents which should be the first priority...love and respect. Really, folks. I don't see what all the stir is about. This model has been successfully excuted for eons. Us common folk call it plain ole' common sense coupled with good parenting.

@ ScuttledCuttle: I don't just side-eye folks who talk like this. I run, not walk, in the opposite direction at the first mention of a buzzword.

I haven't read the article, but I don't understand family meetings. 1. No one at work likes meetings, they are rarely productive, and people rarely are in a position to take responsibility for something (always tasked to ask), 2. What about just having conversations over dinner and breakfast?

I like the general idea of this, but I don't think it needs to be so rigid.

I would have loved the opportunity to talk to my parent about things out in the open, in a bit of a safe space, and know that there would be debate and discussion, and then move on with the day and week. In fact, I yearned for it.

Much better than the panic inducing "Come here" / "I need to talk to you" unexpectedly. Or discussing a hot topic over a nice dinner, ruining it. As a quiet introvert, I just hid all of my problems instead because I didn't want to voice them and ruin something, or have to argue over others. I still do. Just because I don't like to be the one to bring things up.

I would drop them if they weren't productive though. I think something as simple as "we're going to talk about _____" on Thursday would be fine.

I shared this with my husband who's in IT and he asked "what about the standing meetings?" Apparently a big thing in agile software businesses is to make everyone stand during meetings and conduct them in someone's cubicle or a hallway and just generally avoid the conference room. I'm sure these families aren't forcing their kids to stand in place for 20 minutes each week, but it was funny to imagine. I wish the article *had* shared what /whether they had tried anything from the business model that turned out to be a negative.

Families having meetings reminds me of the family in a movie with Charlotte Gainsbourg: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478724/ . I was a fan of the gavel.

I like this idea!!! Growing up my mother would complain we behave like hotel guests, but really, we had no saying in almost anything (from smaller things like meals to bigger ones like classes we took), and I felt disconnected. One very gross memory; there wasn't a bed sheet changing day, and I remember realizing one day that I had been using the same set without washing for months - my mom was very busy, my dad is old school, my sister and I were a bit lazy and with a lot of schoolwork.

I really like this idea as a layout, I'm not sure I would implement it this way. However, I've already tackled weekly meals in a similar fashion and it's really working.