agenda

[GUEST2008]

Hi

He went into every high-level meeting these days knowing there were at least three agendas and also knowing he'd only be told one of them.

Could "agenda" mean here case/matter?

So he went into every meeting knowing that they would touch upon three matters there, but they would tell him only about one of the matters.

 

[SoothingDave]

I think it's more likely that "agenda" refers to what individuals attending the meeting hope to accomplish there. They may be told they are meeting to discuss one thing, but the other parties at the meeting may be hoping to decide some other matter, or steer the group to a decision they prefer.

Everyone comes to the meeting with his own "agenda."

 

[Barb_D]

And we also talk about "hidden agendas" - the real reason something is happening, but not the official reason.

 

[GUEST2008]

But is my interpretation of the original sentence pretty much correct? Or not? How do you understand it?

 

[bhaisahab]

Where does this come from?

 

[GUEST2008]

Where does this come from?

It's about a CIA agent.

The whole paragraph says:

It wasn't that he (the agent) wasn't cynical. You couldn't do this job as long as he had and not cross that line a long time back. Experience without cynicism was a sure sign your brain had dry-rotted and you hadn't bothered to notice. He went into every high-level meeting these days knowing there were at least three agendas and also knowing he'd only be told one of them.

It seems to me he went to the meeting, there were people who wanted to do their business, talk about matters important to them, but somehow he were told only part of what they wanted to talk about :?::-?

 

[bhaisahab]

It's about a CIA agent.

The whole paragraph says:

It wasn't that he (the agent) wasn't cynical. You couldn't do this job as long as he had and not cross that line a long time back. Experience without cynicism was a sure sign your brain had dry-rotted and you hadn't bothered to notice. He went into every high-level meeting these days knowing there were at least three agendas and also knowing he'd only be told one of them.

It seems to me he went to the meeting, there were people who wanted to do their business, talk about matters important to them, but somehow he were told only part of what they wanted to talk about :?::-?

I think it's very poorly written, perhaps I am being a bit stupid, but it doesn't make any sense to me that there would be several agendas and he would only hear one.

 

[GUEST2008]

I think it's very poorly written, perhaps I am being a bit stupid, but it doesn't make any sense to me that there would be several agendas and he would only hear one.

Yeah, I thought about the same. He went to the meeting, people talked about, say, three matters and he heard only one of them. So was he at the meeting or not? :-D

 

[Barb_D]

No, it does not refer to topics to be discussed. It has to do with the overall purpose of the meeting.

There is the official agenda of a meeting. It's what is distributed or printed or talked about at the beginning of a meeting.

However, a secondary agenda may be to demonstrate who is really in power. By subtly having one person lead the majority of the discussions, you can show that she is now in a position of greater importance than others in the room. You don't have to say "Jane is now my favored employee and I think she is more capable than Tom," but by having Jane take over roles previously held by Tom, you can signal this shift.

It doesn't have to be "evil." Maybe another employee, Alice, hasn't had much leadership experience. By having her lead several of the topics, your secondary agenda of developing her leadership skill is also met.

 

[SoothingDave]

If it's about the CIA, it's surely about hidden agendas and secret, behind-the-scenes and/or political items.