Distribute an agenda beforehand; don’t hold meetings without one; stand if possible
Grade BMedium benefitTimeFreeLittle timeNo willpower
When an agenda is shared beforehand, attendees are more likely to view the meeting as useful. In experiments, seated meetings lasted 34% longer than standing ones, yet the quality of decisions reached under both formats was identical.
- Cost
- No monetary cost. Organizers spend 5–10 minutes writing an agenda before the meeting. Standing meetings require participants’ cooperation.
- Benefit
- Two studies involved 958 and 292 participants respectively. Results showed that meetings with pre‑distributed agendas were perceived as more effective by attendees — a statistically significant relationship. In another experiment, 55 groups met while seated and 56 while standing; seated meetings again ran 34% longer, with no difference in decision quality between the two formats.
- Notes
- The standing‑meeting experiment involved five‑person groups working on tasks in a lab setting. These findings cannot be directly applied to lengthy meetings or large conferences. Leach measured participants’ subjective perceptions of effectiveness rather than actual output levels.
Sources · 2
- Leach, D. J., Rogelberg, S. G., Warr, P. B., & Burnfield, J. L. (2009). Perceived meeting effectiveness: The role of design characteristics. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(1), 65–76. doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9092-6
- Bluedorn, A. C., Turban, D. B., & Love, M. S. (1999). The effects of stand-up and sit-down meeting formats on meeting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2). doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.2.277