I counted my meetings for one month in early 2023. Thirty-seven meetings. Total time: 42 hours. That’s more than a full work week spent in meetings during a four-week month. When I audited which of those meetings produced actual decisions or moved work forward, the answer was twelve. Twenty-five meetings — 28 hours — produced nothing that couldn’t have been accomplished with an email, a shared document, or a five-minute phone call.
I was furious with myself. Twenty-eight hours per month of my life — and my team’s lives — wasted in rooms (physical or virtual) where we talked about things without deciding things. At my consulting rate, that’s roughly €4,200 per month in lost productivity. Across a year, €50,000. For meetings that didn’t need to happen.
The meeting diet was born out of that audit. In three months, I cut my meetings from 37 per month to 16 — a 57% reduction — while improving communication, decision speed, and team satisfaction. The key wasn’t eliminating all meetings. It was eliminating the wrong meetings and making the right ones dramatically more effective.
The Meeting Audit (Start Here)
Before you cut anything, understand what you’re cutting. Track every meeting for two weeks and ask three questions about each:
Question 1: Did this meeting produce a decision or an action? If the answer is no, the meeting probably shouldn’t have happened. Status updates, information sharing, and “alignment” conversations rarely require real-time synchronous meetings.
Question 2: Did this meeting require live interaction? Some meetings benefit from real-time discussion: negotiations, brainstorming, sensitive feedback, and complex problem-solving. Many don’t. “Let me walk you through this report” can be a recorded video. “What’s everyone working on this week?” can be a shared document.
Question 3: Did this meeting need all the people who were in it? Most meetings have too many attendees. Three people are essential. Five more are there “to be informed.” Those five should get a summary email instead of losing an hour of productivity.
After two weeks, you’ll see patterns. In my audit, the breakdown was:
- 32% of meetings were necessary and well-run
- 30% of meetings could be replaced with async communication
- 22% of meetings were status updates that should be a shared document
- 16% of meetings had no clear purpose and should be eliminated entirely
Applying the EAOS framework to meetings works perfectly: Eliminate purposeless meetings, Automate status updates (with shared documents), Outsource information sharing (to async tools), and Systematize the meetings that remain.
The Three Types of Meetings Worth Having
After the diet, I allow only three types of meetings:
Type 1: Decision meetings (30 minutes maximum). These exist to make a specific decision. The agenda is one question: “Should we do X?” or “How should we handle Y?” Every participant is someone whose input is needed for the decision. The meeting ends when the decision is made, not when the calendar says so.
Format: 5-minute context review (everyone reads a pre-shared document beforehand), 15-minute discussion, 5-minute decision and action assignment, 5-minute buffer.
Type 2: Problem-solving meetings (45 minutes maximum). These exist to work through a complex problem that requires multiple perspectives. Client escalations, strategic challenges, or process breakdowns. The agenda is the problem statement and any relevant data.
Format: 5-minute problem framing, 25-minute structured discussion, 10-minute solution documentation and next steps, 5-minute buffer.
Type 3: Relationship meetings (25 minutes maximum). One-on-ones with team members or clients for relationship maintenance, coaching, and feedback. These are the only meetings that don’t require a specific agenda because their purpose is connection.
Format: “What’s going well? What’s challenging? How can I help?” — then genuine conversation.
Conspicuously absent: status update meetings, “alignment” meetings, brainstorming meetings (I do brainstorming async — it produces better ideas when people think independently first), and “let’s catch up” meetings with no purpose.
The 25-Minute Default
I changed all my meeting defaults from 60 minutes to 25 minutes. This single change had the largest impact on my calendar.
Why 25 minutes works:
Parkinson’s Law applies to meetings. Work expands to fill the time allocated. A 60-minute meeting will take 60 minutes even if the content could be covered in 20. A 25-minute meeting forces focus from the first second.
It creates buffer time. Back-to-back 25-minute meetings leave 5-minute gaps for notes, transitions, and bio breaks. Back-to-back 60-minute meetings leave nothing.
It signals seriousness. When you book a 25-minute meeting, you’re saying “this will be focused and efficient.” It sets the expectation that everyone comes prepared and stays on topic.
Most topics genuinely fit. The vast majority of business discussions can be resolved in 25 minutes if people prepare beforehand. The exceptions (complex problem-solving, negotiations) get 45 minutes.
I was skeptical at first. Surely some conversations need an hour? After twelve months of 25-minute defaults, I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve genuinely needed more time. Every other instance, 25 minutes was sufficient — and the conversation was better for the constraint.
This connects to the weekly CEO review principle: structured time constraints produce better results than open-ended time slots.
Async Alternatives (Replacing Meetings with Better Communication)
For every meeting you eliminate, you need an alternative communication channel. Here’s what replaces what:
Status updates → Shared document. A simple Google Doc or Notion page where each team member updates their status weekly. Everyone can read it on their own time. No meeting needed.
Information sharing → Recorded video. “Let me walk you through this report” becomes a five-minute Loom video. The recipient watches at 1.5x speed, pauses where needed, and doesn’t have to coordinate schedules.
Quick questions → Direct message. Slack, Teams, or even text message. A question that takes 30 seconds to answer doesn’t need a 30-minute meeting.
Feedback on documents → Comments in the document. Instead of “Let’s meet to discuss the proposal,” leave comments directly in the document. More specific, more actionable, and asynchronous.
Team alignment → Weekly email summary. I send a brief Monday email to my team: this week’s priorities, any important updates, and what I need from each person. This replaces the Monday “alignment meeting” that used to consume 45 minutes.
The key principle: default to async, escalate to sync. Most communication works better asynchronously because people can process information at their own pace and respond thoughtfully. Reserve synchronous meetings for situations that genuinely benefit from real-time interaction.
Protecting Your Calendar
Cutting meetings only works if you prevent new unnecessary ones from creeping back. Here are my calendar rules:
No same-day meeting requests. Unless it’s genuinely urgent (client crisis, legal issue), meetings need at least 24 hours notice. This prevents the reactive scheduling that fills calendars with low-value conversations.
Meeting-free mornings. I don’t accept meetings before 11 AM. Mornings are for deep work — content creation, strategy, and complex problem-solving. These activities require uninterrupted focus that meetings destroy.
Maximum four meetings per day. More than four meetings in a day leaves no time for actual work. If my calendar hits four, the fifth request gets pushed to tomorrow.
Every meeting has a pre-read. If you want to meet with me, send a brief description of what we’ll discuss and what decision we need to make. If you can’t articulate this, we probably don’t need to meet.
These rules felt radical when I implemented them. Some people were initially frustrated. But within a month, the quality of my meetings improved dramatically because only the important ones survived the filter. And my productive output increased measurably because I reclaimed 20+ hours per month.
Implementing the Diet (The 30-Day Challenge)
Week 1: Audit. Track every meeting. Answer the three questions. Categorize each meeting.
Week 2: Eliminate. Cancel every recurring meeting that failed all three questions. Replace with async alternatives. Communicate why: “To be more productive, I’m replacing our weekly status meeting with a shared document. Here’s the link.”
Week 3: Restructure. Convert remaining meetings to 25-minute defaults. Add agenda requirements. Reduce attendee lists to essential participants only.
Week 4: Protect. Implement calendar rules (no same-day requests, meeting-free mornings, four-meeting cap). Enforce consistently.
After 30 days, count your meetings again. You should see a 40-60% reduction. The time you’ve reclaimed is now available for the work that actually grows your business.
Takeaways
-
Audit your meetings for two weeks. Ask: Did it produce a decision? Did it require live interaction? Did it need all attendees? Most founders find 50-60% of meetings are unnecessary.
-
Allow only three meeting types. Decision meetings (30 minutes), problem-solving meetings (45 minutes), and relationship meetings (25 minutes). Eliminate everything else.
-
Default to 25 minutes, not 60. Parkinson’s Law applies — shorter meetings force focus and are almost always sufficient.
-
Replace eliminated meetings with async alternatives. Shared documents for status, recorded video for information sharing, direct messages for quick questions, and email summaries for alignment.
-
Protect your calendar with rules. No same-day requests, meeting-free mornings, four-meeting daily cap, and required pre-reads. Enforce consistently.
