January 2008 Archives

I suggested last week that my group set up a series of "punch meetings" to keep us on track for a project we're currently working on. These would be quick, half-hour meetings to discuss progress on action items and to figure out what each of us needed to do next. Those of you who know me know that I'm not a big fan of meetings. Actually, I should clarify: I'm not a big fan of overly long or useless meetings. If a meeting is over an hour in length, I think it should be a working meeting, not a talking meeting. Know what I mean?

The long and short of it was that no one but me had heard the term before--so my colleague Brian Panulla looked for it. Nothing. So in true "former English teacher" fashion, I consulted the Oxford English dictionary. Nope--no "punch meeting," but enough of the definitions there made me feel justified in using (coining?) the term. Here's what I found:

From various definitions in the OED:

• punch list n. chiefly U.S. a list of items such as small repairs, unfinished work, etc., that must be completed in order to fulfil a construction contract, typically created at the end of a project.
• 2. fig. colloq. (orig. U.S.). A high or impressive level of forcefulness or effectiveness; vigour, effectiveness, impact.
• B. adj. Short and thickset; squat, stout. Cf. PUNCHY adj.1 Now rare (Sc. and Eng. regional (north.) in later use).
• III. To strike or hit.

Thus, my definition of "punch meeting" would be a short meeting where the goal is to hit a list of items that must be completed with the maximum level of impact.

Punch Meeting.. Get it? :)