I'm wondering about the constitutionality and/or value of a hybrid targeted tactical meeting (I couldn't decide between Stractical or Tactegic so I just went with Targeted Tactical Meeting) to process tensions relating to a certain topic like an upcoming event or big initiative with lots of projects owned by many roles.

I think the root of the tension I am sensing is during a regular Tactical Meeting, we end up with a collection of items to triage surrounding a particular event which ends up dominating the meeting so we get through them as quickly as we can and then still have very rich conversation regarding the event later in the day or week which surfaces additional tensions to process outside the meeting. This is great but we could have easily just kept going and had the rich discussion and planning session within the Tactical Meeting as the outputs are numerous and awesome! If we just have a "planning meeting", it ends up working like a Tactical Meeting since it's just so useful to follow the Tactical Meeting model and all we are doing is processing event-related tensions anyway and creating additional outputs for our roles which we then have to enter in GlassFrog later as opposed to just opening a Tactical Meeting in GlassFrog and having the Secretary capture everything in real time as a true Tactical Meeting.

The I've been going back and forth based on some of the rules in the Constitution, mulling on processing and requested meetings over execution vs. duty to process. If we were to institute TTMs and a tension surfaces as a result which may not pertain directly to the event or initiative, do we ask the Role to hold that tension for the next general Tactical Meeting or is that a violation of duty to process? Since processing inbound requests may be done in batches by individuals, is it such a stretch to batch tensions and processing into subject specific blocks, especially if the Lead Link has prioritized this event or initiative in the circle since that would trump individual goals?

Additionally, as a facilitator, if someone were to surface a tension that may not be relative to the event but is important to that Role, there is obligation to triage it but I still see such value in keeping focus on a certain topic. Is it as simple as calling the session a planning meeting and using GlassFrog to capture the outputs individually with each person logged in? The rub there is the tremendous value of sending the outputs of the meeting out to all Circle Members for those who may not have been present especially if the initiative is important enough to take priority at the circle level.

This has all been jumbling around in my head for a while and I worry I may be stretching some of the rules or misinterpreting. I would love feedback or suggestions from others who may have successful practices in place for targeted meetings.

Thank you!