An interesting suggestion to look at Jury duty and see what's been working well in this 800 year old system and what we can port over to our team meetings. The article lists 5 ideas:

1. Why we are here: This is obvious. No members of a jury are ever in doubt about why they're in a room together. Is that true for all our meetings?

2. The size is right: 12 is a good number. You get enough diversity of opinions while still making sure every member is engaged. The tech equivalent is the 2-pizza rule.

3. One agenda and no one leaves until the decision is reached: I don't know if it's feasible to port this over. But it's an interesting idea. Members of jury don't "circle back", they don't "put a pin in it". They discuss until the decision is made. And the choices are clear from the get go, so it doesn't result in wild brainstorms about tangential topics.

4. Jury selection: This was my favorite point. The jury members are picked to be from diverse backgrounds and anyone whose mind is already made up is not selected. Product discussions usually happen within a particular team. But what if we asked coworkers from other teams to make guest appearances?

5. The trial: The trial makes sure that opposing views are presented to the jurors before they start deliberating. What's the tech equivalent of this? Brainstorms, strawman proposals, someone playing devil's advocate?