At the start of 2023, Shopify was in the headlines for a seemingly radical idea: cancelling all meetings with more than two people. Following its move to full remote work in 2020, this sudden shift towards an anti-meeting culture was an experiment intended to improve productivity and reduce time wasted. It was a bold, if not ham-fisted, approach to tackling a common problem faced by organizations.
Meetings, though often shunned as time-consuming and unproductive, generally serve to consolidate ideas, generate feedback, and achieve alignment. However, as the culture now shifts towards asynchronous communication, we should consider the true costs and benefits of daily meetings. Can the value generated by a meeting be reproduced asynchronously? And can such a sweeping generalization be applied to all meetings involving multiple individuals?
Continuing on their crusade against meetings, Shopify took a step further and launched a ‘meeting cost calculator’. This tool computes the ‘cost’ of a meeting, presumably based on the estimated combined salaries of the attendees. This resulted in another headline-grabbing media cycle for Shopify for an idea that is not novel and almost certainly more gimmicky than useful.
First off, the calculator is inherently flawed. It assumes a linear correlation between time spent in meetings and productivity, which is not the reality for many employees. As knowledge workers, we are not paid for time spent on a problem, but rather the resulting output.
Moreover, this tool indirectly devalues the human aspect of work - the collaboration, connection, and camaraderie. It’s important to remember that not all ‘work’ is visible or quantifiable. The ideas that sprout from watercooler chats or the connection built in a team huddle are intangible yet crucial aspects of a thriving work culture.
Redefining Effective Meetings
Don’t get me wrong, I’m no advocate for unnecessary meetings. As a PM, I understand the significance of a streamlined work process. But the problem with meetings often isn’t the meeting itself, but rather the mismanagement and misuse of meetings.
So, instead of creating a culture of shame around meetings, why not take a step back and look at how we can make them more effective?
In my experience, the success of a meeting hinges on three factors: a clear agenda, thorough preparation, and active participation. Each meeting should have a distinct purpose, which should be communicated to all participants well in advance. Secondly, attendees should be given enough time to prepare for the meeting. This could mean booking some extra time before the meeting for necessary prep work, or providing documents to review ahead of time that will be discussed during the meeting. Lastly, encouraging everyone to actively participate contributes towards better collaboration and results in more diverse perspectives being shared.
While I ultimately disagree with the the approach Shopify has taken, it can be used as an opportunity to audit the efficacy of our current work processes. As we move towards a more asynchronous and remote world, we must not forget that human connection remains a core part of our work. We should strive to strike a balance between efficiency and empathy, between asynchronous communication and personal connection. Improved productivity will emerge naturally from that balance, rather than imposing a forced cultural shift.
So, the next time you find yourself scheduling a meeting, don’t just consider the monetary cost. Instead, consider the value of what you, and others, can bring to the meeting, as well as what you all stand to gain. When looking at the efficacy of meetings, the correct metric to track is the quality of the output, not the estimated cost.