Before scheduling, ensure a meeting's purpose is to Decide, Debate, Discuss, or Develop (4Ds). Then, confirm the topic is either Complex, Emotionally intense, or a One-way door decision (CEO). This rigorous filter eliminates status updates and other low-value synchronous gatherings from calendars.

Related Insights

The feeling of being over-scheduled is a symptom of running ineffective meetings with no clear purpose. These bad meetings create new problems that then spawn more meetings to fix them, creating a vicious cycle of wasted time. The solution is better meetings, not fewer.

To maximize the value of bringing teams together physically, focus on one of three goals. "Doing" involves collaborative work on a key project. "Learning" focuses on gaining business context. "Planning" aligns the team on strategy and roadmaps. This framework ensures gatherings are purposeful and effective.

Before attending a meeting, ask two questions: 1) "What specific decision or alignment will this create?" and 2) "What happens if we don't have this meeting?" If you can't provide clear, impactful answers, the meeting is a waste of time and should be canceled or handled asynchronously.

Instead of listing vague topics like "team discussion," structure each agenda item with a verb and a noun (e.g., "Decide Q4 budget," "Align on launch strategy"). This simple framing forces clarity on the desired outcome for each item and helps determine if it even requires a synchronous meeting.

If a recurring meeting serves multiple purposes (e.g., status, strategy, and tactical), it's a "Frankenstein" meeting that should be eliminated. Audit your meetings, assign a single label (Tactical, Strategic, or Operational) to each, and split any meeting that has multiple labels into separate, focused sessions.

The first step to better meetings is asking "should we have this meeting at all?" By eliminating purely informational meetings, you prevent the formation of norms like disengagement and silence. This makes it more likely that when a collaborative meeting is necessary, team members will actively participate.

Calendly's research reveals a paradox: while the common sentiment is anti-meeting, a vast majority (81%) of professionals believe more productive meetings would help them at work. This suggests the problem isn't the quantity of meetings, but their quality and purpose. People crave effective, decision-oriented collaboration.

Executive time in an M&A process should not be wasted on routine status updates. The steering committee's primary purpose is to be a decision-making body. Meetings must focus exclusively on program health, escalating critical risks, and making key decisions that functional teams cannot resolve on their own.

Instead of incrementally auditing meetings, a "meeting doomsday" involves deleting all recurring meetings for 48 hours. This forces teams to consciously rebuild their calendars from scratch, questioning the necessity, cadence, and attendees for every meeting, which is more effective than defending existing ones.

Adopt the private equity board meeting model: circulate a detailed brief a week in advance. This forces attendees to consume updates asynchronously. The meeting itself can then be dedicated entirely to debating critical, forward-looking decisions instead of wasting time on status reports.