Meetings: what research says about their effectiveness
Criticising meetings is a classic. Research shifts the question: less “how many meetings?” than “what happens while they take place?”.
The perceived cost
Steven Rogelberg and colleagues (2006, Journal of Applied Psychology) show that meeting load is associated with fatigue and a sense of overload, especially among people strongly focused on their own goals. The effect depends on how useful meetings are perceived to be.
What observation reveals
Simone Kauffeld and Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock (2012, Small Group Research) coded videotaped team meetings. Solution-oriented behaviours (proposing, structuring) are associated with satisfaction and, later, with success indicators; complaining and digressions go the other way.
The limits of these findings
These studies remain largely correlational and rely on specific samples, notably in Germany. They do not prove that any single rule — an agenda, a fixed duration — is enough. They show where to look. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What follows for management
Mechanically cutting the number of meetings treats the symptom. The lever best supported by the data is the internal dynamic: a clear purpose, room for proposals, and a chair able to bring digressions back to a decision.
A practical implication, verifiable in-house
For a week's five recurring meetings, write one line on the decision or action produced. Those producing none twice in a row should be redefined or dropped. It is a diagnosis we run with Bern teams before any work on the calendar. To go further: explore the Time Management & Prioritisation training in Bern, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Time Management & Prioritisation in Bern
- time management & prioritisation
- Bern
- research
- training bern