Meetings: A Necessary Evil of Business

"If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be meetings."—Dave Barry

Few things unite the working world like a shared disdain for meetings.

If you've heard someone say, “I love my job, but I hate the meetings,” you’ve just met an honest person. And if someone exclaims, “I love meetings!” you’ve likely encountered an optimist trying to boost morale.

The Dilemma of Meetings

Have you ever sat in a recurring meeting where someone asks about your deliverables? You suddenly realize you haven’t even returned to your desk since the last gathering. Now, faced with expectant stares, you're scrambling to appear productive. Internally, you're questioning if this meeting is what’s preventing you from doing actual work. It’s a vicious cycle—meetings about work that leave no time for work.

Yet, meetings are part of modern business life. Patrick Lencioni bluntly stated in Death By Meeting: “For those of us who lead and manage organizations, meetings are pretty much what we do.” Love them or hate them, meetings are where teams align, decisions get made, and strategies are developed. The challenge lies in making them worthwhile—and that is where most meetings often fail spectacularly.

The Problem with Attendees

Meetings often resemble wedding guest lists: some attendees are essential, some feel obligated, and others are there just to fill seats. A larger gathering makes it harder to keep everyone engaged. It also increases the chance of devolving into chaotic side conversations and distracted attendees scrolling on their phones.

I once found myself in a meeting with 25 people. Out of those, five truly understood the topic. The remaining 20 were simply there to vent. After countless complaints and no actionable plan, I declared, “The airing of grievances phase is now over.” Only five people got the joke.

To improve this situation, implement the two-pizza rule. If two pizzas can’t feed the group, the meeting is too big. Only invite those who truly need to participate. Allow others to opt-in based on their desire to contribute. If the meeting organizer isn’t clear about why someone is invited, that’s a sign they probably shouldn’t be included.

Evaluating Attendee Roles

There are two types of people in meetings: decision-makers and information providers. The common mistake is assuming both need to be present simultaneously.

Once, I was invited to a meeting alongside a skilled product manager. I asked the organizer, “Which one of us is leaving?” His confusion was evident. He explained that Bruce was invited for his knowledge, while I was there for decision-making. I turned to Bruce and said, “You are now empowered to make decisions.” Then, I exited.

Too often, companies treat decision-making as a hierarchy-driven process. If a person is attending just to give approval on a consensus, your meeting has already been hijacked by bureaucracy. Instead, empower those closest to the work to make decisions. This approach is quicker and saves everyone from unnecessary calendar clutter.

Rethinking Meeting Necessity

Not every issue needs a meeting. In fact, most don’t.

A product management team I knew spent an astonishing 90 minutes every single day discussing bug severity ratings with QA. Instead of a standardized rating system, they treated each bug like a court case. “This one seems critical—should we classify it as a ‘1’?” The result? Wasted hours, arbitrary decisions, and endless frustration.

A clear rating system could have streamlined this process:

1: Critical—customers cannot perform a core activity (fix immediately).
2: High—customers cannot perform a secondary activity (prioritize for work).
3: Medium—a feature isn’t working as designed (backlog).
4: Low—a feature isn’t functioning as expected (backlog).
5: Enhancement—customers request a new feature (wishlist).

With this rating system, a 90-minute daily meeting could be condensed into a single message.

Before scheduling another meeting, ask: “Can this be resolved through an email, document, or Slack thread?” If the answer is yes, cancel it. For issues that need input but don't require immediate discussion, opt for asynchronous updates like quick video messages or collaborative documents.

Avoiding Poor Meeting Practices

The only thing worse than an unnecessary meeting is a poorly run one. I can admit I fall into this trap often: poor organization and sloppy time management.

The main issue is a lack of clear purpose. If a meeting invitation doesn’t state its expected outcomes, it shouldn’t happen.

Meetings frequently start late and run over time. A simple rule: Start on time and end on time. Remember, we all have packed schedules and need a few minutes between meetings to recharge.

There’s also the common mistake of spending 80% of the time on minor details, then rushing through decision-making at the end.

And, the biggest issue of all: leaving without clear next steps. Participants exit unsure of what was decided or who carries responsibility. A week later, someone asks, “Did we actually agree on that?”—and a new meeting is scheduled to discuss the last meeting.

Essential Remedies

To tackle these problems, implement these simple solutions:

Set a strict time limit and stick to it. If a meeting is scheduled for 30 minutes, it should not stretch to 45.
Utilize a facilitator. Someone needs to steer the conversation to avoid going in circles.
Summarize key takeaways at the end. Clarify what was decided and the responsibilities assigned.
Follow up in writing. A quick email or Slack message outlining decisions and action items ensures everyone is aligned.

Consider using a meeting monitor, such as Zoom’s AI companion or Fathom, to capture discussion points and follow-up items. This can reveal patterns in meeting management. Reviewing notes can highlight issues such as lack of focus, side conversations, and deviations from the agenda.

Making Meetings Effective

Not all meetings are detrimental. Some, when done correctly, are essential.

Decision-making meetings should be small, focused, and centered on clear choices. Alignment meetings should be brief and concluded with written summaries. Brainstorming sessions need structure to keep ideas flowing without veering off course. Daily standups should last no longer than 15 minutes. If you're hearing lengthy presentations, then something's amiss.

The key is intentionality in meetings. If you're organizing one, ensure it has a purpose. If you're attending, confirm that your presence is necessary. And if a meeting goes off track, it’s perfectly acceptable to interject with, “Do we need to keep discussing this, or can we decide?”

Mastering effective meetings can save time and earn the admiration of every colleague who has sat through a tedious two-hour status update that could have been conveyed via an email.

Meetings should be a tool for productivity—not an obstacle to genuine work.

Want more practical methods for managing products? Learn more about our Fundamentals of Managing Products program.