New Column: Why Some Reports Don’t Land

You join a weekly project progress meeting. A team member begins their update. 

The explanation is thorough, and the effort behind the work is evident. Yet you may find yourself thinking:

“So what’s the conclusion?”
“What do you need from me?”

Many presenters explain their work in the order they carried it out—background, analysis, and detailed steps. While all of this may be relevant, it does not always help the listener quickly understand the current situation.

What managers typically want to know is straightforward:

Is the project on track?
Are there any risks or issues?
Is a decision required from me?

In short, they are not looking for a full activity log. They are looking for a clear view of the situation and what action may be needed.

This gap often arises because presenters speak from the center of their own work—what they did, how they approached it, and where they spent time. As a result, the original purpose of the meeting can become less visible.

In our training, we emphasize the importance of reorganizing information from the listener’s standpoint. Reporting is not about demonstrating effort; it is about enabling understanding and decision-making.

There are several types of reporting—issue escalation, consultative updates, and routine progress reports. Each requires a different structure.

In progress meetings especially, what matters most is showing where things currently stand. Starting with the overall picture allows discussions to move forward more effectively.

What does the audience need to know?
What action should follow?

Pausing to consider these questions can significantly improve how reports are received—and how projects move ahead.