I believe that structuring work around the premise of "holding absolutely no meetings" is just right for efficiency.
Of course, this comes with prerequisites. The organization must be one where all stakeholders can read text well, and where they actually read materials sent via email or shared documents.
The writer also needs to put in effort: write readable sentences, place key points where they are visible, etc. But if you do that, people will read it. In such an organization, I think about 90% of meetings could be eliminated. Here are my notes on why.
What’s Great About a World Without Meetings
First, work proceeds asynchronously, so there is zero time constraint.
The rule that "you must be at the same place at the same time" is incredibly annoying. Removing this alone changes the world.
Second, consider the speed of understanding.
In meetings, materials are usually explained verbally. Unless the speaker is exceptionally good—explaining faster than one can read—the audience understands better by reading silently. Most people just read the slides aloud. Some books even suggest saying things not written in the presentation. That’s foolish; just write it down.
Therefore, unless the presenter is brilliant, silent reading is faster.
Look at the numbers: speaking is about 300 characters per minute. Reading is about 400 characters per minute, and you can skim known parts. Thus, reading is overwhelmingly faster.
For understanding, reading documents beats listening in meetings. This is certain.
The Lie That "Meetings Generate More Ideas"
A common counterargument is, "But meetings generate more ideas."
Is that true?
Reflect on your meetings this week. How many times did you feel, "That was a great idea," or "Meetings are productive and fun"? For me, it’s rare—maybe 2-3 times a month. Truly surprising discoveries happen once a month at most.
Moreover, in the age of AI, brainstorming with AI covers unexpected perspectives. So the "miracle moments" from internal meetings are even rarer.
Talking to outsiders might yield new insights, but with familiar colleagues, those "aha!" moments are scarce.
So, arguments like "meetings are needed for active discussion" are unnecessary. Email, Slack, and documents are far faster.
What You Need Instead of Meetings
To work without meetings, three skills are essential:
1. Ability to Structure Problem-Solving Logic
It sounds complex, but it’s simple:
- Purpose: What problem are we solving?
- Background: Why must we achieve this purpose?
Clarify these, then list 3 options (A, B, C).
Define 5 judgment criteria:
- Effectiveness
- Cost
- Speed
- Feasibility
- Risk/Side effects
For non-huge projects, aligning on "Good/Bad/Neutral" for each option is enough.
Then ask: "Based on these criteria, I recommend Option A. Here is the plan... Is this okay?"
If yes, proceed. If no, get feedback. That’s it.
2. Ability to Write Clear, Concise Text
This is manageable.
Read one book on writing (any highly-rated one on Amazon). Then, ask a senior colleague to redline your emails/docs for a month. Bow deeply if necessary.
If no senior is available, use AI: "Critique my writing for readability." Feed it summaries of writing guides and ask for specific improvements.
Do this for a month, and anyone can improve. The goal is simply "writing clearly for everyone."
3. Ability to Ask Closed Questions
Ask: "I want to proceed this way. Yes or No? If No, please provide an alternative."
If alternatives are hard, ask for "minimum concerns or hints." Always frame questions for Yes/No answers.
These steps make work move swiftly.
Spreading This Culture in Organizations
To scale this, I aggressively brand myself as "Meeting-Hater."
When a meeting invite arrives, I ask, "Is this really necessary?" Even with senior attendees, I send a document beforehand stating my views. During the meeting, I suggest moving to chat-based workflows next time. I push for shorter durations (e.g., 30 mins instead of 1 hour), even to superiors.
By consistently doing this, people accept, "He’s the type who avoids meetings." Interestingly, no one has ever complained that my approach causes trouble. It’s efficient, and eventually, others realize it’s easier too.
When Meetings Are Unavoidable
If a meeting is mandatory, start with silent reading.
As host, I give participants 3 minutes to read the material silently. Then ask, "Any questions?" This often ends the meeting quickly (15-30 mins).
I use this for performance reviews too. I submit goals and status updates in advance. We read them together, align expectations, discuss gaps for 10-15 mins, and finish with light chat.
Summary
Assume you cannot hold meetings. How would you work?
Thinking this way makes everything efficient.
You need: Logical structuring, clear writing, and closed questions. To spread it, relentlessly brand yourself as anti-meeting. This keeps meeting counts optimal.
