Designed by Scott Lewis from The Noun Project

Designed by Scott Lewis from The Noun Project

Time spent together is not always time spent getting work done. According to research by Atlassian, the average workers spends 31 hours in unproductive meetings over a month.

In an interview with Fast Company, Connie Williams, CMO & Chief Knowledge Officers at Syneticsworld, suggested changing meetings from an hour to 37.5 minutes to respect people’s time:

I think it’s funny. You set an hour for a meeting, and you’re always at an hour and 5 minutes. As the end of the hour approaches, the leader recognizes that “We’ve just wasted 55 minutes and now we’ve really got to make some decisions.” The problem is that people are already halfway out the door. Do everyone a favor and reach that epiphany much earlier. If people get out of a meeting early haven’t gotten something done, they’ll come back the next time.

By reducing the time allocated to complete the meeting, you’ll be compelled to reach an outcome much quicker.


  • Dave

    I agree, this goes right along with the book Brief: Make a Bigger Impact by Saying Less by Joseph McCormack. Let get right to the point, spend the extra time getting back our personal lives.

  • jasonshah

    Totally agree with the sentiment. By having a timer in the meeting – which is possible with – it’s kept people mindful about time management and focuses on reaching an outcome quicker as the article mentioned.

  • UberOnTime

    It makes sense to keep important meeting brief, so you don’t sway away to things that don’t matter.

  • Kristen Berryhill

    I completely agree. With a predetermined (and shorter) time for the meetings, it encourages people to come more prepared and ready to address the needed issues. People are much less likely to chase rabbits and will feel more accomplished in the end. I’m looking to share this with my office to shorten our weekly meetings and get more out of them.

blog comments powered by Disqus