other women!

You need a proper chairperson who can summarise the discussion and turn the summary into a decision and a secretary, in league with the chair, who minutes the 'decisions'!

Soutra Buy them a badge with "MD" on and they can all take a turn about.

Re the people watch, that's exactly what I do with my in-laws. I sit back and watch the show.

Same as mishap said

If the groups drive you up the wall, soutra, why not leave and join something else? Or just back out of the 'organisation' stuff and enjoy their company. Say nowt and people watch. It might be amusing. It sounds as if they just like meeting each other. I presume there is a plentiful supply of tea and cake? Just enjoy the teabreak

Well - it's just people. Not the UN. I would go with the flow and chuckle about it to myself. I live in a tiny village which is lucky enough to have some very active people, so lots of things going on - and they are all organised in this happy, but bumbling fashion. I enjoy the charm of it all.

That should be "all the others chip in "

The group dynamics in my in-laws are fascinating to observe - there are 6 siblings, the extremely matriarchal MIL has advanced Alzheimers and is cared for by one of her daughters. The problem is, with her (the leader) effectively gone, they can never achieve consensus in deciding about anything including their mother's care, finances etc. This is the interesting bit for me: my husband, who has strong leadership skills is the only male offspring, and he is the middle child. He hasn't got a hope in Hades of taking the lead in this group (well so far anyway). Let's not forget that all the partners and husbands chip. I'm the only SIL and I have learnt to stay right out of it

Yes difference between chairing where you have to get a consensus and being the boss.
Academics don't have a boss in the normal sense so nobody "tells them what to do" . Which is bossing not leading.

I think I posted this a couple of years ago, but anyway - I heard Charles Handy once, as I commuted, on Thought for the Day; paraphrased, he said he had been at the LSE chairing a meeting of learned professors, and it had gone on, and on, and on:

"I was reminded of the Roman centurion who said to Jesus 'Lord, I say to one man come, and he cometh, and to another man go, and he goeth.' and you know, I wished I was that centurion!"

Not all groups have anyone who is formally "in charge" of things. Jess M is right though, group dynamics will be ever present. Soutra, either find yourself morphing into an unofficial group leader, or accept it's as it is - and breathe

Who's actually in charge of this fiasco?

Group dynamics Soutra - every group needs people willing and able to step into various roles. The one where you make sure everyone is included and looked after. The one that has bright ideas and makes suggestions. The one where you make sure all the t's are crossed etc etc. They also need people to fulfil leadership roles particularly if there is a task, however small, that needs doing. Sometimes this is all embodied in one official leader who does it all. Sometimes everyone chips in and helps the group get the task done. The groups you describe are very informal and have no official leader, so task completion (e.g. agreeing a date) relies on group members doing their bit. This does not mean being bossy. It is quite subtle, saying things like "So we have a number of ideas, how about we go round in turn and just briefly say which we prefer" or "Can i just summarise, everyone but Chris is able to make the 3rd, but no one else is." Or "can i make a suggestion - there's a problem with every week next month, so shall we have a show of hands and just decide on numbers"
In fairness all woman groups can be good and men can be as bad or worse. I had a boss once who used to book a team management meeting to last a morning in his not very full diary and us other 3 used to almost die of impatience as he waffled around the subject and resisted making decisions.

soutra there is only one solution.
At the earliest opportunity, propose that your group elects a Chair, with responsibility for identifying tasks and then delegating them.
Then elect yourself as Chair.

Oh heck, I think this may be a sign of council syndrome, having a meeting to plan a meeting, then having one to discuss the findings (if any!) of the previous meeting etc etc ad nauseum!

Another sign to look out for is starting a meeting by someone reading aloud the minutes of the previous meeting, even though all those present have had a copy of them in advance.

My ex boss was guilty of this, it meant that the first 20 minutes or so of each meeting was given over to him reading IN FULL the minutes that we had all bloody had and sodding read before the damn meeting that was taking place!

I had a horrible nightmare that it would end up in a sort of "groundhog day" situation where we just forever read the minutes of the previous meeting, which started with the minutes of the meeting before, which started with the minutes of the one before that, which started with...............................................