Meetings

Meetings are a necessary evil. Necessary because it is hard to coordinate without them. Evil because they both take up time and split up large blocks of time necessary for focused work (eg coding, studying, writing). My personal rules for meetings are:

  1. If a meeting can be replaced by an email then it should just be an email. (details)
  2. If a meeting can end early then it should end early. (details)
  3. Schedule meetings in blocks to maximize time available for focused work. (details)
  4. If your attention is not important, you should be free to a) not attend, b) leave early, or c) multi-task during the meeting. (details)

I try to follow these rules when conducting and scheduling meetings with others and would prefer that other people do the same.

(That being said, please don't be afraid to book a meeting with me after reading this page! These rules are more like "preferences" rather than something I strictly enforce)

Elaboration on meeting rules

1: email

If a meeting can be replaced by an email then it should just be an email.

More precisely, "replaced by an email" here means replaced by an email exchange where the cumulative time spent for all parties is comparable to how long a meeting would take. To give some examples:

  • "Status updates" where everybody shares their project status without any further interactions. It would not take the "updater" much more time to write their update instead of saying it, and it would take similar time (or less) to listen to the update.
  • "Announcement" meetings (unless it is something very urgent). Similar logic to above.
  • "Live demonstration" broadcast by video (videos can also be sent as emails). If the demonstration is not interactive, then recording the video is basically the same amount of effort as a live recording.

2: end early

If a meeting can end early then it should end early.

This does not mean that meetings should be rushed, it just means that ending early should be the norm. I would rather leave 5 minutes early and catch up on a few small tasks (e.g. email) then stay in a meeting for misc smalltalk or tangential follow-up discussions.

3: blocks

Schedule meetings in blocks to maximize time available for focused work.

This could be having all meetings on a small number of days, or just generally trying to schedule meetings back-to-back in order to free up a larger chunk of time elsewhere in one's day.

4: leave or multi-task

If your attention is not important, you should be free to a) not attend, b) leave early, or c) multi-task during the meeting.

Some meetings require continuous attention (eg 3 people working together to solve a complex problem). However, many meetings are not like this. Imagine A and B are writing a book, and C is just helping with the illustrations. If A, B and C have a project update meeting where 75% of the discussion is about the contents of the book and only 25% is about the illustrations, 3/4 of the meeting is a waste of time for C.

How should this be handled? I think ideally the meeting would be split into two shorter meetings: one just between A and B about content, and one just about illustrations with A, B, and C.

If this is not possible, a respectful alternative would be to discuss illustrations at the beginning with A+B+C, then allow C to leave (if they want to) before continuing the rest of the meeting with just A and B.

If this is also difficult, the next best thing would be to allow (and possibly expect) C to be multi-tasking or otherwise not actively engaged for most of the meetings (eg answering emails or reading something else), then engage them when they are needed. I think this happens a lot in meetings anyway (especially online meetings), so I think it would be best to recognize and normalize this behavior.

Asymmetric meetings

When there is a big disparity between the availability or priorities of the different attendees of a meeting, I think it can be sensible to schedule the meeting in an asymmetric way: for example, calling spontaneously when one of the attendees has time, with the other attendees being effectively on standby.

I prefer to avoid such asymmetric meetings when possible in the aim of treating people as equals. However, if I am in a position where my calendar is very full but still want to make time to meet, then I may propose such an asymmetric meeting. Please don't interpret this negatively: I am essentially offering the option of meeting me earlier than I would otherwise be able to. It is merely an option: do not feel obligated to accept.

Conversely, if you want to meet with my but feel you cannot clear a specific slot on your calendar, then feel free to offer an asymmetric meeting to me. I won't be offended by the proposal; if I think it is inappropriate or unwarranted I will just say no and propose a more "symmetric" meeting.